The Divisional Controller, KSRTC, Mysuru Rural Division, Bannimantap, Mysuru, herein v. Sri. N K Krishna
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of modifying the Award
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 settle the terminal benefits to the respondent…
- Para 33. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of modifying the Award dated 10.02.2023 passed by the District Judge and Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Mysuru in I.I.D. No.3/2020 vide Annexure 'E'. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- MEMBER RAK 4 FILED BEFORE LOK ADALAT HIGH COURT LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE,BENGALURU…
Judgment
SRI. P.D. SUBRAMANYA, MEMBER W.P. No. 20518/2023 (LK) (Lok Adalat No.1639/2024) BETWEEN: The Divisional Controller, KSRTC, Mysuru Rural Division, Bannimantap, Mysuru, herein represented by the The Chief Law Officer, KSRTC, Central Offices, K H Road, Shanthi Nagar, Bangalore-560 027. (By Sri. B L Sanjeev, Advocate) ...PETITIONER AND Sri. N K Krishna, S/o Kampayya, Aged about 62 years, R/o. Nijaganahalli, Hosakote Post, KR Nagara Taluk, Mysuru District-571 617. (By Sri. S P Ramesh, Advocate) RESPONDENT 2 THIS WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE AWARD DATED 10.02.2023 PASSED BY THE LABOUR COURT, MYSURU IN I.I.D NO.3/2020 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-E. THIS 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 passed by the District Judge and Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Mysuru in I.I.D. No.3/2020 dated 10.02.2023 Vide Annexure-E.
#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 petitioner - KSRTC has agreed to settle the terminal benefits to the respondent - workman till his superannuation considering continuity of service only, the order denying one increment with cumulative effect remains unaltered. He is not entitled to consequential benefits and backwages. The respondent - workman has agreed for the said settlement". 3
#3. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of modifying the Award dated 10.02.2023 passed by the District Judge and Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Mysuru in I.I.D. No.3/2020 vide Annexure 'E'. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- MEMBER RAK 4 FILED BEFORE LOK ADALAT HIGH COURT LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE,BENGALURU BEFORE THE HIGH COURT LOK ADALAT WP. NO. 20518/2023 (LOK ADALATH NO. 1639/2024) BETWEEN: THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, KSRTC ... Petitioner AND: SRI. N.K. KRISHNA ... Respondent JOINT MEMO The WP filed against the award IID. No.3/2020 Dated 10.02.2023 on the file of The District Judge and Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Mysuru, 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 settle the terminal benefits to the respondent - workman till his superannuation considering continuity of service only, the order denying one increment with cumulative effect remains unaltered. He is not entitled to consequential benefits and backwages. 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 25/01/2024 at Bengaluru Bench. 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, the writ petition is disposed of modifying the Award
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — arts. 226, 227.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No treatment data yet for this judgment in the Courts & Cases corpus.
Absence of data is not a statement about the judgment’s standing — the corpus covers only judgments we index and link with cited evidence.