Divisional Controller, KSRTC, Kolar Division, Kolar v. G. Venkatesh
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 petitioner – KSRTC has agreed to reinstate the respondent – workman into…
- Para 33. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of in terms of the Joint Memo modifying the Award dated 03.12.2021 passed by Principal District and Sessions Judge and Labour Court, Kolar in I.D. No. 6/2018 vide Annexure ‘A’. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- MEMBER Rbv* 4 HIGH COURT…
Judgment
THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA & SRI. P.D. SUBRAMANYA, MEMBER W.P.No.19312/2023 (LK) (Lok Adalath No. 1640/2024) BETWEEN: Divisional Controller, KSRTC, Kolar Division, Kolar, Represented by its Chief Law Officer, KSRTC, Central Officer, K.H. Road, Bengaluru-560 027. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. HAREESH BHANDARY T., ADVOCATE) AND: G. Venkatesh S/o M. Gopal, Aged about 52 years, Residing at Kilaripete, Hoskote Taluk, Bengaluru Rural-562 114. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. K.V. SOMASHEKARA REDDY, ADVOCATE ) 2 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE AWARD DATED 03.12.2021 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND LABOUR COURT, KOLAR IN I.D. NO. 6/2018 VIDE ANNEXURE ‘A’ AND ETC. THE PETITION COMING ON FOR CONCILIATION BEFORE LOK ADALAT, THE FOLLOWING CONCILIATION ORDER IS PASSED: CONCILIATION ORDER In this petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the Award dated
03.12.2021 passed by Principal District and Sessions Judge and Labour Court, Kolar in I.D. No. 6/2018 vide Annexure ‘A’ and the order dated 13.12.2019 passed by the Principal District and Sessions Judge and Labour Court in ID No.6/2018 vide Annexure ‘B’.
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 petitioner – KSRTC has agreed to reinstate the respondent – workman into service with continuity of service, without consequential benefits, without backwages from the date of dismissal till the date of actual reinstatement. 3 Further, the absent period will be treated as not a continuous service under Section 2A of the Gratuity Act. The pending default cases, if any, which are filed will be re-opened. The Respondent – workman has agreed for the said settlement
.
Operative part
Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of in terms of the Joint Memo modifying the Award dated 03.12.2021 passed by Principal District and Sessions Judge and Labour Court, Kolar in I.D. No. 6/2018 vide Annexure ‘A’. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- MEMBER Rbv* 4 HIGH COURT LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE,BENGALURU BEFORE THE HIGH COURT LOK ADALAT WP. NO. 19312/2023 (LOK ADALATH NO. 1640/2024) FILED BEFORE LOK ADALAT BETWEEN: DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, KSRTC ... Petitioner AND: G. VENKATESH ... Respondent JOINT MEMO The WP filed against the award in ID. No. 6/2018 Dated 03.12.2021 on the file of The Principal District And Sessions Judge And Labour Court, Kolar, has been settled between the parties on the following terms and the award may kindly be modified as under:
The petitioner – KSRTC has agreed to reinstate the respondent – workman into service with continuity of service, with consequential benefits, without backwages from the date of dismissal till the date of actual reinstatement. Further, the absent period will be treated as not a continuous service under Section 2A of the Gratuity Act. The pending default cases, if any, which are filed will be re-opened. The Respondent – workman has agreed for the said settlement
. The parties to this petition have set their hands to this settlement before the Lok Adalat in the presence of Conciliators on this 01/03/2024 at Bengaluru Bench. Sd/- Sd/- SIGNATURE OF PETITIONER SIGNATURE OF RESPONDENT 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, 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.