W.P.N(). 14793199:
Adv.)
%
" ~ --. Sic Tliimfnappa,
' w.AgTez:1_abcJut49 ymrs,
_ ' -Fife.) Emrgi-gudi Badavama,
' 1.3"' Cross, Hmmaili,
' Davanagete. "RESPONDENT
V (By Sri.V.S.Naik &. Smt.Manjula.N.Kuli<:ami, Advs.)
IN "run HIGH crevm 01+' KARNATAKA
BANGALORE j %
DATED THIS THE 27"" DAY 01? T 1
Wfimi .'
THE HONBLE MR.JUSTlC_E %
wan' PETITION N(_)_,_;*47§3"v§);£;200§i'C.f\NV':;*O§_§;66 OF
BE'I'WEEN:
Kamataka ':3mt:%:4R_,0'ac:'i"-- » "
Transp_ort..C6'm_(5r3'£i9n, "
Davanagere A13§Y_iSi_ 9:2,' . ' V
Davanagers; V ' f .
By its {)i§v.i_sio;1aI Ccntrniier,
Reprcscnteéby-its
Chief Law Otficeh' % ..PE'I'ITIONER
M.;f";!J63}::¢.shi;.*arappa,
V
(By smjiei;RT:1¢:;§,;k;a;,=A;2v.)
% yms was '¥?etition is filed under Amazes 226 and 227 of
' 'i:hé 'CdHstitu£io:;--* 'of India praying to quash the award of the
V *Priz;oEg§al_L'a"i:sour Court, Hubli in KID No.54,«'04 c!'t.22.9.08, the
ofwhich is pmdnced and marked as Anx.A to the
This Wfit Petéticm is filed under Ariicles 226 anci~._22'7 of
the Consiituticn of India praying to quash the aw'aa"ti._ the
Principal I_.abm.2r Court, Hubli in KID No.5-*-U04
(A11neX.E). " -1~
W.P.N{}.20366l99:
Bl*Z]'W'LIjN :
Sri.M.T.Loksshwarappa,
Sic Sri.Thimmappa,
Aged about 48 ywrs,
Rio Durga-gndi ExtensVébn..A _ A , _
R/at 13"' Cross, Honnalh"-Post, '- _ } * _
Dist: Davanagcre. " "-.:Vv_' ,..-7F'ETITI0NER
(By sn.V.s.Naik;& 'Snjgi-.Mé;n}i1Ié;}'}§§Ii{t1'i§:93;f1i? Advs. )
Am); .... "
The; Managcrnént cf Kamat4.é£:a'T
Transport Corperafjpn, »-
Davafiagera 2
Davanagereg, V
B32its.;f)igfsé€:na1'.C0z3troIi¥:fV.V' ' ' ..RI«:sPoNn12:N*r %
agent the}: petitioner is aggrieved.
W
3
These Wet Petifions coming an fer preliminary hearing
this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER
These two petitions have been filed
award passed by the Pri. Labour % tin:
K.I.D.No.54/’O4 one by the Managetneztte31ti’–aié{§t}ter*
workman respectively.
2- The Managemezgt beiVng– Byvvtheiorder of
reinstatement of the worltthen has flied this
petition:’e1id<'_ the for grant of ccmtimzity of
servie_e_ andether eevnéeqsueaitial benefits as it is not specificaily
V' .Amet3t::f0n,ed in the evi1a'I'd 'is before this Court.
As it transpires, during 1983 the workman was
' epminted as :1 Conductor. Allegizzg the disability to perferm
the duties on obtaining the regnrt fmm the medical board on
\}<'
for back wages on the pfinciplc of no pay and n0 work and
much less when there is no evidence on record to sho\\é fiz:;t he:
was not gainfully employed. Even the w0rk:naI_1:a!'<s§.:;V':
have given an undrmaking that he wouid
wages. In that View 0f the
passed by the labour Court
order passed to pay flag back Ivgbis oréered
that the; Management tn the suitabie '
post, within c;#i¥f;:unicafion efthis
ordcrz ' and other amnfifiqucnfiai
bencfifs, wages.
” A£:3ordinQg:ij?,”i§oth the pctitians are allowed in part
Self”!
‘Judge