HIGH COURT LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE v. Reddappa
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
Accordingly, these Writ Petitions are disposed of in terms of the Joint
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 WP filed against the award in I.D. No.54/2017 Dated 22.11.2019 on the…
- Para 33. Accordingly, these Writ Petitions are disposed of in terms of the Joint Memo modifying the Award 22.11.2019 passed by the II Additional Labour Court, Bengaluru in I.D. No.54/2017 . Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- MEMBER Rbv* 5 FILED BEFORE LOK ADALAT HIGH COURT LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE,BENGALURU…
Judgment
(BY SRI. M.C. BASAVARAJU, ADVOCATE) AND: The Divisional Controller, BMTC, East Division, Central Offices, K.H. Road, 2 Shanthinagar, Bangalore-560 027. …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 PASSED BY THE II ADDITIONAL LABOUR COURT AT BANGALORE IN I.D. NO.54/2017 DATED 22.11.2019 VIDE ANNEXURE ‘A’ IN SO FAR AS DENIAL OF CONSEQUENTIAL BENEFITS AND BACKWAGES ARE CONCERNED AND ETC. IN W.P. No.14462/2021: BETWEEN: Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation, East Division, Dommaluru, Bengaluru – 560 003, by its Divisional Controller, Rep. by its Chief Law Officer.. ...PETITIONER (BY SMT. H.R. RENUKA, ADVOCATE) AND: Reddappa R. S/o Venkataramanappa, Aged about 46 years, C/o Vice President, Karnataka Rasthe Sarige Mazdoor Sangha, BMS Office, OTC Road, Cottonpet, Bangalore-560 053. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. M.C. BASAVARAJU, ADVOCATE ) 3 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE AWARD DATED 22.11.2019 IN I.D. NO.54/2017 PASSED BY THE II ADDITIONAL LABOUR COURT, BANGALORE VIDE ANNEXURE ‘G’. THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR CONCILIATION BEFORE LOK ADALAT, THE FOLLOWING CONCILIATION ORDER IS PASSED: CONCILIATION ORDER In these petitions, the petitioner – Workman and respondent – Corporation have prayed for quashing the Award 22.11.2019 passed by the II Additional Labour Court, Bengaluru in I.D. No.54/2017 vide Annexures ‘A’ and ‘G’ respectively.
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 WP filed against the award in I.D. No.54/2017 Dated 22.11.2019 on the file of the Second Additional Labour Court, Bengaluru has been settled between the parties on the following terms and the award may kindly be modified as under: The respondent - Corporation to reinstate the workman into service without consequential benefits, without backwages and withholding of two annual increments with cumulative effect
. 4
Operative part
Accordingly, these Writ Petitions are disposed of in terms of the Joint Memo modifying the Award 22.11.2019 passed by the II Additional Labour Court, Bengaluru in I.D. No.54/2017 . Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- MEMBER Rbv* 5 FILED BEFORE LOK ADALAT HIGH COURT LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE,BENGALURU BEFORE THE HIGH COURT LOK ADALAT WP. NO. 20496/2021 LOK ADALATH NO. 158/2024. C/w WP NO. 14462/2021 LOK ADALATH NO. 794/2024. BETWEEN: V. REDDAPPA ... Petitioner AND: THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, BMTC. ... Respondent JOINT MEMO These WP filed against the award in ID No.54/2017 Dated 22-11-2019 on the file of the Second Additional. Labour Court, Bengaluru has been settled between the parties on the following terms and the award may kindly be modified as under: The Respondent Corporation to reinstate the workman into service without consequential benefits, without back wages and withholding of two annual increments with cumulative effect. The parties to this petitions have set their hands to this settlement before the Lok Adalat in the presence of conciliators on this 19-01-2024 at Bengaluru Bench. SIGNATURE OF PETITIONER SIGNATURE OF RESPONDENT Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- ADVOCATE FOR PETITIONER ADVOCATE FOR REPONDENT
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, these Writ Petitions are disposed of in terms of the Joint
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.