GOPASHETTY v. THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, KSRTC
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of in terms of the Joint Memo
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India arts. 226, 227
Key paragraphs
- Para 22. After negotiations, the parties have arrived at settlement. Accordingly, both the parties have filed a Joint Memo duly signed before the Lok Adalath. The said Joint Memo reads as follows : “The Respondent – KSRTC has agreed to pay lump-sum of Rs.20,000/- to the…
- Para 33. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of in terms of the Joint Memo modifying the Award dated 03.12.2012 passed by the Presiding Officer, First Additional Labour Court, Bangalore in Ref No. 09/2010 vide Annexure ‘A’. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- MEMBER Rbv* 4 HIGH COURT LEGAL…
Judgment
Smt. Mahadevamma W/o Late Gopashetty, Aged about 49 years. G. Ravi S/o Late Gopashetty, Aged about 29 years. G. Annapoorna D/o Late Gopashetty, Aged about 25 years. G. Rajkumar S/o Late Gopashetty, Aged about 23 years. G. Lakshmi D/o Late Gopashetty, Aged about 20 years. All are resident at : 2 No.36, 7th Main, 7th Cross, Gandhinagar, Near Hosaker, Kengeri Satellite Town, Bangalore – 560 060. ...PETITIONERS (BY SRI. L. SHEKAR, ADVOCATE) AND: The Divisional Controller, K.S.R.T.C., Bangalore Rural Division, KIMCO Building, Mysore Road, Bangalore – 560 026. …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. H.R. RENUKA, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED AWARD DATED 03.12.2012 PASSED IN REF. NO.09/2010 BY THE FIRST ADDITIONAL LABOUR COURT, BANGALORE VIDE ANNEXURE ‘A’, IN SO FAR AS IT RELATES TO DENIAL OF BACKWAGES AND CONSEQUENTLY DIRECT THE RESPONDENT MANAGEMENT TO PAY FULL BACKWAGES AND OTHER CONSEQUENTIAL BENEFITS TO THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES OF THE DECEASED WORKMAN FROM THE DATE OF DISMISSAL TILL THE DATE OF DEATH OF THE WORKMAN I.E. FROM 30.07.2008 TO 01.09.2009. THE PETITION COMING ON FOR CONCILIATION BEFORE LOK ADALAT, THE FOLLOWING CONCILIATION ORDER IS PASSED: CONCILIATION ORDER In this petition, the legal representatives of the petitioner – workman – Gopashetty has prayed for quashing the Award dated 03.12.2012 passed by the 3 Presiding Officer, First Additional Labour Court, Bangalore in Ref. No. 09/2010 vide Annexure ‘A’.
#2. After negotiations, the parties have arrived at settlement. Accordingly, both the parties have filed a Joint Memo duly signed before the Lok Adalath. The said Joint Memo reads as follows : “The Respondent – KSRTC has agreed to pay lump-sum of Rs.20,000/- to the LRs of the deceased employee as full and final settlement of the case. The LRs of the deceased – workman has agreed to receive lump-sum of Rs.20,000/- as full and final settlement”.
#3. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of in terms of the Joint Memo modifying the Award dated 03.12.2012 passed by the Presiding Officer, First Additional Labour Court, Bangalore in Ref No. 09/2010 vide Annexure ‘A’. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- MEMBER Rbv* 4 HIGH COURT LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE,BENGALURU BEFORE THE HIGH COURT LOK ADALAT WP. NO. 16871/2013 (LOK ADALATH NO. 181/2024) FILED BEFORE LOK ADALAT BETWEEN: GOPASHETTY ... Petitioner AND: THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, KSRTC ... Respondent JOINT MEMO The WP filed against the award in Ref. No. 09/2010 Dated 03.12.2012 on the file of The First Additional Labour Court, Bangalore, has been settled between the parties on the following terms and the award may kindly be modified as under: “The Respondent – KSRTC has agreed to pay lump-sum of Rs.20,000/- to the LRs of the deceased employee as full and final settlement of the case. The LRs of the deceased – workman has agreed to receive lump-sum of Rs.20,000/- as full and final settlement”. The parties to this petition have set their hands to this settlement before the Lok Adalat in the presence of Conciliators on this 22/02/2024 at Bengaluru Bench. SIGNATURE OF PETITIONER SIGNATURE OF RESPONDENT Sd/- Sd/- ADVOCATE FOR PETITIONER ADVOCATE FOR REPONDENT Sd/- Sd/-
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of in terms of the Joint Memo
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — arts. 226, 227.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.