The Karnataka State Road … vs The Deputy Labour Commissioner on 6 August, 2009

'"'--v._1:>".i:v3:sIoN No.1, moon

 BANa4aI.cm£ -- 560029.

I

IN -mu mesa COURT 0? KAR1u>:rA1<A AT 

DA-mm arms rm 5"" ms: or Auc;IJsw1,--¥'. éaA'c'9-L:~..  _

THE now 31.3 :52. Jus-1-Iczt, 

THE szoursm MR.JUSfI.'1§2.'E 1::-.v1'  

W .A..NO.187.9 OF*2G0§CL'<??Q _ 7
BE'3.'$-IEEFI: V   _  A "

1 21:33 KARNA';I,'AI<A 
CORPORATIQN  " 2 1 

CENTRAL    
RE}? BY ITS   ' 

mm : '
 mam Lézzéfimmssxwm
= A.?PEI££.h'1'E  mama rm pamrr

 _ 93» 1 Am; B 
" xR'ne,xo2¢L -I mavmaa

"B__.ۤ;  mam: ---- seems.

fxfxfl Assrsmm mwmmua mummy
T A:~m...ass1smH'r macnvtzacomnz.-.as1 - _ 

 mm ' IKfiRA  B G ROAD

3 SHOWKATHAII
S/0 LATE SABJBRSAB

 



Hseesak SIDDARTHAHAGAR (posT),~~-f.:* 
TUMKUR. ~""~ * '
(By smm: A.n.v:aAyAx,AQa )
wars WRIT APPEAL éipgau UfS § Q9 THE
KARHATAKA area cam: ACT BRAKING we smw ASIDE
'rim ORDER pAssm_  my  'wgrr pmrxmxou
uo.7135/2007 namnn 5/3x2a0&;_ x;_*
wars Ap§fi&L :¢o$:$s fég,ufieR° PRELIMINARY
ammzne *raJ:.$ ;:vz».:r,.  .3;*' DELIVERED -rm
FoLLw:ne: **' ~;.'« " V .3
 """   
fiéabfi'tfi駢6u§s$; for the appellant and

the Govéfiphenfi-aflybfiéte for respondents-1 and

“»2; “§h¢ ashort question that arises for

cbnéideréfiibfi of this Court in this appeal is

wheEhe£ the dfilay in filing the appeal before

A fthé*A§pe11ate authority and: the pxavisios

as Payment of Gratuity mt 1972 has pgmex to

=.condone the delay in filing the appeal.

W

different opinion than the one
the Appellate .Autarity gg :wé;;T_ég*.§y. fins?
Leaxnad Single Judge. ‘ ‘ V ”

5 . Accordingly, the :§. s

6. Since the at the

time of pr;e3_~f;’_ m ;’4nai¢’1′ 2 ‘we not think

it necesgagg to cn§&¢3¢ 25¢ delay of 59 days
in fi?Z:}.ingA . ‘

. __.V_ Sdf’
Iudge

Skif-

Judge