Karnataka Court December 2002 Judgments

A. Siddaramaiah Vs. the Asst. Labour Commissioner and the Controlling ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2003KAR5010; (2004)IILLJ175Kant

ORDERGopala gowda, J.1. The petitioner who was working as Driver in Kanakapura Depot, Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (in short 'the Corporation') has filed this Writ Petition seeking for issuance of a writ of certiorari or order or direction quashing that portion of the order passed by the first respondent dated 6.6.2000 vide Annexure -D directing the Corporation to pay the balance amount of Rs. 4,628/- as against Rs. 38,669/-. Further the petitioner has sought for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the second respondent to pay the aforesaid balance amount of gratuity urging various facts and legal contentions.2. The case of the petitioner is that, he was appointed as Driver in the Kanakapura Depot of the Corporation which is under the jurisdiction of 2nd respondent on 13.11.1976 and retired from service on 31.12.1994 on attaining the age of superannuation after rendering service for a period of 18 years and one month. His basic pay was Rs. 2,325/- per month and was d...

Asian Institute of Rural Development Vs. Bangalore City Corporation

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2003KAR2477; 2003(1)KarLJ478

ORDERN.K. Patil, J. 1. The petitioner questioning the legality and validity of the endorsement bearing No. DA/WARD.S4(A) KTR/28/2001-02, dated 26-6-2001 (Annexure-A) issued by the respondent. Further, sought for a direction directing the respondent to effect necessary change of katha in the name of the petitioner pertaining to the landed property bearing Sy. No. 12/1 measuring 1360 sq. yards and Sy. No. 12/2 measuring 1830 sq. yards situated at Khatriguppa Village, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk. 2. The petitioner is a Non-Governmental Organisation registered as a Public Charitable Trust on 5-8-1976. It is an autonomous, non-political, non-sectarian, non-racial and a non-commercial secular and service oriented organisation. It is established as a regional institute for problem oriented scientific research and result oriented field action in Rural Development. Further, the case of the petitioner is that, its organisational structure consists of the Board of Trustees which has ...

The Divisional Controller, Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation, ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: [2003(97)FLR958]; 2003(2)KarLJ341; (2003)IILLJ330Kant

1. The Transport Corporation, being aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge refusing to interfere with the award passed by the Labour Court, has preferred this intra-Court appeal.2. It is not in dispute that the Corporation under its letter dated 11-4-1995 (Ex. W. 1) had proposed to the respondent to engage him as conductor on daily wage basis for a sum of Rs. 46/- per day against short-term vacancy as a substitute in place of regular employee who may be placed under suspension pending enquiry or remaining absent to the duty unauthorisedly. The respondent agreed to the proposal. As such his name was included in the list of daily wagers. Subsequently, as and when occasion arose, his services were utilised by the Corporation as a substitute. Annexure-J to the interlocutory application filed on 3-9-2002 gives details of the days on which services of the respondent were utilised. Subsequently, on review of work performance of daily wagers including the respondent, the Appointing...

North West Karnataka Road Transport Corporation Vs. B.U. Doni

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: (2003)IIILLJ962Kant

G.C. Bharuka J.1. The Road Transport Corporation is the appellant herein. It has questioned the validity of the award passed by the Labour Court as also the order of the learned single judge by which, the respondent who was serving as driver with the appellant, has been directed to be reinstated despite the fact that he was found to be involved in a fatal accident.2. The respondent was working as a driver with the appellant- Corporation. On December 27, 1992, he was driving the vehicle of the Corporation bearing registration No. KA 09/F 1185, which was plying from Haliyal to Manki. Near Manchikeri village, the bus met with an accident resulting in death of a doctor who was coming from the opposite direction in a motor cycle. The Assistant Traffic Inspector of Corporation investigated the incident and submitted his report. Based on the report, disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him, and the inquiring officer based on materials placed before him, held that the respondent was...

Parvathi and anr. Vs. Venkatramana Prasad and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2003KAR2304

ORDERRaveendran, J. 1. First respondent filed O.S. No. 57/1992 on the file of the Civil Judge. Puttur on 14.9.1992 against respondents 2 to 11 (defendants 1 to 5 and 7 to 11) and Appellants (defendants 6 and 12) seeking a decree: (i) directing partition and separate possession of his 1/42nd Share in the suit 'B' schedule properties; (ii) directing the defendants or such of them as are liable to render account in respect of the income received from them till date of suit and to pay future mesne profits to him at a rate to be determined by the Court till delivery of possession of the property. (iii) for payment of Rs. 200/- as the cost of the lawyers notice; The plaintiff filed a valuation slip showing the actual market value of the B Schedule properties as Rs. 81,50,000/- and the market value of his 1/42nd share as Rs. 1,94,047.61. He stated that the Court Fee payable in regard to the first relief (Partition) is Rs. 200/- under Section 35(2) of the Karnataka Court Fees and Suit Valuat...

The Managing Director, North East Karnataka Road Transport Corporation ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: [2003(97)FLR678]; 2003(2)KarLJ13; (2003)IILLJ279Kant

S.B. Majage, J.1. The respondent-workman, who was working as conductor, was subjected to domestic enquiry on the charge of not issuing tickets to 9 passengers despite collection of fare from them and thereafter, he was dismissed from service. So, he approached the Labour Court by raising an industrial dispute. The Labour Court held that said charge is not proved, but found violation of 'issue and start' rule and consequently, sot aside the order of dismissal and ordered for reinstatement with 25% back wages. Aggrieved by it, the appellant-Corporation filed writ petition in this Court. The learned Single Judge affirmed said finding and maintained the order of reinstatement but refused entire back wages. Hence, this intra-Court appeal by the appellant-Corporation.2. It is vehemently argued for the appellant-Corporation that charge of pilferage is proved by the evidence adduced, but the Labour Court has wrongly held it as not proved, and similarly, the learned Single Judge has failed to c...

M. Anantha Padmanabha Bhat Vs. Kali Poojarthi and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2003(2)KarLJ176

M.F. Saldanha, J. 1. We have heard the appellant's learned Advocate, learned Advocate for the contesting' respondent and the learned Government Advocate on merits.2. This appeal is one more classic illustration of a situation in which despite Land Tribunal having granted substantial areas of the land to the applicant leaving aside one very small piece for very valid reason that desperate attempt is made to grab that piece of land also.3. Briefly stated, the original applicant who is the father of respondent 1 had applied for the grant of occupancy rights in respect of six pieces of land. The Tribunal by order dated 5-8-1981 granted occupancy rights in respect of 5 of the lands in question about which there is no dispute because the landowner has, as per the indication in the record virtually conceded the claim. Despite this, we must say to the credit of the Tribunal, that there is a clear indication in the order that even though the proceeding was virtually ex parte that it has fulfill...

Martandappa B. Hosalli and ors. Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2003(2)KarLJ419

ORDERVishwanatha Shetty, J.1. Though these petitions are listed in the orders' list, with the consent of the learned Counsels appearing for the parties, these petitions are taken up for final hearing and disposed of by this order.2. Some of the petitioners in these petitions are either Group 'D' employees or Junior Assistants in the employment of the 4th respondent-University (hereinafter referred to as 'the University). In these petitions they have called in question the correctness of the Government Order dated 30th March, 2000, a copy of which has been produced as Annexure-A. In Annexure-A, the 1st respondent in exercise of the power conferred on it under Sub-section (8) of Section 8 of the Karnataka Universities Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), nullified the Resolution Nos. 26 and 27, dated 24th December, 1998 passed by the Syndicate of the University. In Resolution No. 26, the Syndicate of the University took a decision to extend the benefit of pay scale of Rs. 80...

Lalitha and ors. Vs. Divisional Controller, Karnataka State Road Trans ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2003ACJ1751

M.F. Saldanha, J.1. We have heard the learned Counsel who represents appellants as also the learned Counsel who represents the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 on merits. At the outset we need to record that this appeal throws up for decision a very interesting position in law and we shall illustrate precisely as to how the controversy has arisen. The appellants are the wife and two sons of one S. Sridhar who admittedly was a driver employed by the K.S.R.T.C. On 22.10.1990 he was on duty and driving a K.S.R.T.C. lorry bearing registration No. MEF 7782. An accident occurred due to the floods in which Sridhar was killed and his claimants filed M.V.C. No. 182 of 1991 before the M.A.C.T. at Mysore claiming compensation aggregating to Rs. 5,90,032 from the respondent Corporation. Admittedly, the deceased was drawing a salary of Rs. 3,467 per month as he was a senior driver aged 50. The Corporation, inter aliaw, took up the contention that since the deceased was an employee of the Corporation and the...

The University of Agricultural Science Employee House Building Co-oper ...

Court: Karnataka

Jain, C.J.1. This matter has been remitted by an order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 4.10.2001. Now it has been placed before us. The points in issue are what will be relevant date qua Section 6 notification, whether it is the date of publication in the Gazette or the date of declaration i.e., whether it would be 9th May or 23rd May in the instant case, and whether the notification was issued within one year of the publication of Section 4 notification. Their Lordships while allowing the appeals, set aside the decision of the Division Bench and remanded the matter for fresh consideration and it was kept open for the parties to file affidavits indicating the starting point of limitation for the purpose of Section 6 notification.1a. For consideration of the above point, it is necessary to narrate the relevant facts:Lands situated in yalahanka, Jakkur and Shivanahalli villages in Bangalore North Taluk, Bangalore, were proposed for acquisition for providing house sites to members of U...