High Court Karnataka High Court

Shri V R Bhojegowda vs The State Of Karnataka on 1 December, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Shri V R Bhojegowda vs The State Of Karnataka on 1 December, 2009
Author: Ram Mohan Reddy
wwmmti Ii

Wmwgfmafumm we mmmwmszmamm wwm mwwaw Ma" mmnmmammm vmzwm wmwmfi W?' mmwwmimmm. Hmiw z..;%.:.mm" W? %#%§€Mfi;E"fia%.R HEQM %%

EH THE HIGH COURT GF I(f£RflA'I'AKA., BAHQRLORE

DATED THE ON THE 15"? EA'! OF' DECEh$ER 2069

BEFORE

 

snmxm, Bammwm ,   
A<:mnA13oU'r5aYEAm   '
3/cum   _  - 
    "  
ammm QFTKE   "    
mmrAmEx1:cmr1vE*sx@aN.uaL  A

KAVERIH'gEERA"'.  . H'! 

No.12, aim r::msIe'H% '  %  

{Ji:;;j§"'a§+:I 3.3".' ,3

 PETITIGNER

1.

” _ zs:mm%%%@1r Kaxmmxa
X nemfimmm 09 mxmm
éevfinermm 0:: K1-mmm
3 3.1.9. Ermnma
% . pa, 3,3, Mmgnxaa ‘arm:
; A maaasons-assess:
F.¥§I-“. E? 1’33 3EC

THE B£&HAGEVG fl
€1&I3’V§ REERRVAM %fi%
4’53 FLXR, CCIFFEE UE£mG
HG, i, 3% 3.38;. A&EB HI

iv’:

vn.<vrvm"'wL mmmm wwmmm» wnu uwmwwwwwmmma WEWW MWWWQ WW fiflfimflifififl WEWW UwWfl§' 0?

BAN®LORE

3. ‘THE El5(ECU”I’IVE ENGINEER
YAGACHI PR€)..IE{.’§’F _
EELUR

4. THE Assrsmm Exmmm; EI§WE:I¢_,~~—– ”
No,12,Hmc ans nmzsxcm ._

mmaamrra mm A ‘. _ A ¢
ammn RAILWAY8TATIGN’«.._V A
Hasaan RmP::>_1eDEIa1’rs:;

czauvmr NEERAVARI Ti” 7

(Bvsm. me. NAo;x$HREE;’G£)a?r;~,A1;w?.;1=’¢R’R3. &
SR1 11.3.3. RAVI, Aus_._r;._: 9558 $2 ~–‘–‘~1:€:4} _

T1113 wan’ ?ET1’1’IOH.I8 Fmzn .UR::aER. ARTICLES 226
a 22? 012 coxsrltmican gm mam Am CALL ma
mm mrrm Rmgtofim 03.1 mi: I?}fLE”fJF–€’£*HE pnssmnm
omega ‘€:£I?JK’1f,–.._ Rmmma
“m THE oR1’:ER:L_i:;T. 1?;a,£aas”‘ PA$$ED IE APPLIATION
NOAIG7

mg r»s*:rri0E% %%s1fRELmu~IAR¥
Hmame T313 DAy,_’m’E GQt.:”7R’r mm ms FOLLGWRIG:

kmg

was sumessftzl in aecmritrg an

_ 2cm in m. mmmfica

V’ – ‘£3 diamfim {Em ffipfifldflilt —

% assmvari xsgama Hi3rami.1:}1a he memm the 1

is: the argthml mat ix… tcmgarary dafly
Gratitlata Assimant within arm mmcifiw fiwm. film

data ef pubiiaatfin «of tha awaxfi, disemitlixg tlcm

M

‘W~fl”‘% 39 wmnwm i 92

V .

Wm mwwmw «war mmmwmnwmm umwrm mwwmm um” mfimwfimwmk Wuwwz mwwm W?” Wmwmamm Wcww mwwsfi QM’ b2§m%€W%{W5M§a% WEQM W

petitionser ts: backwages anfi wmaqumtial amfizfisgse

bm%m, sizm he was a daily wage: enipbyee.
order Mm ckmlfiad by the emplcryer
sufi’m*ed an iz1tm’in1 artist in

dmwtsng’ ‘ rm exnpioyvlt’ ta

Ra.1,£X30/- mt maritlx The

dbnmksad by ordmr dz. 11,f%.20@5′.


2.   N.O4!200'?'
before the     %

 

    mm &ac.

33 (C-Qjivvéf Act, 1947, far as
sin ta ‘I”he Labour Cam
imvim dz, 14.12.2909 and

the fififiazm was a ezazzy

petitim:1m* was mt entitled ta any

L aamrdimy bymaam» an 17%: Mardx
‘ — ‘Gr’ re_}med’ the apyhimtiran, 1%

hi

WWW ate

§
3
E
g
fia-

§
E”

E
3
§
Q
g
3;?

E
E
E
E
E
%
§
§
3
3
g
E
§
§
3
E
E
E
§
E
§
3

ram mwm-x» :3 an

3, Ifitxmrding no me Iearmd mama} for

petifionaer, the d in wagm sf R3s.}.,48,223i.5.+?”. 4
was far the period from 1.4.2001 ta 31.e9,2m::%,
the pemieucy of war’.

Ra.1,om;- per math paid in the peaam

the imam-inn order. E1aberafir1Vg’-§;§:§r3..t11ehV.sai:i
mm coumel eonwmgg the
amounts pafi at the manth
during the the petitsam
was mfitbfi of 123.100/- per
month “fat”(i;rfi’¢:rent rams far
years; «’mV $11: in Ammure — ‘E’,
§’xm<_i that the Labour {'3-::n.u't

award; rqecflm the appfimticn.

‘A mafia, Sri Ramcimaéram mm

‘ ~ 5fr.sx§ ‘the rmpamaantw. -3__ .
‘V V’ was and; mm mw is ea daily wagw, am
af tlm iabour Emzrt was to ram’ tam the

as a dafly wagfi: Acaordirg ta tim laarngzci

M

%uu’¢«rfi’%’M1%’&§ W mmmmm mmm mmm W mmmmm Wm 63mm’? W mmmmm Mama me

subfect ms paywt of Ra.1.,EI€X){~– per

Octxzbuzr 2001 an the diama af the Writ %
wtarman. ‘Tfim, the

as a daily wager by tiw wapkoyer

thewrit I%txt:o’ ‘ 11, is not mini’ 35;} . ‘ ‘V

7. Eva: ;P0®aib}e to
perceive that thg: argmed an
every day ma? so as m
entitle Thee izrztmim cards:
of stay cam of the mmlthly
of the pefiianxar was 5.

of the arm of the Labour

array Lqal irzfkmityg calfi for

bi