IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA ORCWTBENCHATDHARWMD DATED THES THE W" DAY OF FEBRUARY,:V~28Q3:.__I__j' TI" PRESENT: THE HON'BLE MR. P.D. DINAKARAN. « ._ eHIEEAfJ%':tJ$VTTIVCE_% AND THE HON'BLE MR. J-IJISTECE IN..~<.i P.ATiT.. BETWEEN 1 NORTH WEST KARNATAKA ROAD TRANSPORTCORPDRATTDN _ V _ HuBLrD:v:SroNHuSu_-- BY ITS SENIoR_VD.r3/TSTDNAL.coNTRoLLERf . V REP BYITS " CHIEF LAW OF_FlCER.: _ é _ _ I APPELLANT (By Sri: N.DINESI_-T RAO ADVCIDATET. " AND : 1__ ALLA£§AT<SH MAHAIEBIGOBHSAB. KHADAR NAIKAR ~ _'ADU1_.'I" _ A """ " JANATI-IAPLOT I", 'A_T& POEET UERTNASETAGERI A A._.DHARWAD' *- RESPONDENT
{By SRI. K.L.i5A.TrI;.as. SR1. S.S.BETTURMATH, ADVOCATES )
‘THIS WRIT APPEAL rs FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH
, 4i.’CO:UR’I” .AcT”RRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED IN THE WRIT
T ‘–PETsT:o.N ‘NoE2a549/2002 C/W 31684/2004 DATED 30l08/2007.
U THIS W.A. COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY,
. IN.%:{_,PATIi. J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WRIT APPEAL ND. 2023 DE 2007 (L;KSRTc)
5
workman would not be entitled for back wages fromggthe
date of dismissal till the award is passed and
the said writ petitions. « it A
4. In View of the valid
learned Single Judge for dispgosinglitioftinge
we do not find any good
the appellant-Corporaticin-.pg to “orders
impugned passed by the well as by
the learned decline to
interfere in referred above.
byrappeilant–Corporation
is dismissedasdeVoid’..o’i.«rn’et.rits.
Sd/-
….. Chief Justice
Sd/-é
Iudg3