High Court Karnataka High Court

The Divisional Controller … vs Mariyappa @ Hanumappa on 30 September, 2010

Karnataka High Court
The Divisional Controller … vs Mariyappa @ Hanumappa on 30 September, 2010
Author: Ajit J Gunjal
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
CIRCUIT BENCH AT GULBARGA.

IDATED THIS TIWEE 30"" DAY OF' SE-P'.1'EME"3I3R. 2()VE~{)_

B E F' O R E

THE'. IriOE\I*E3LEj: MR. J'US'E'E(3}33 AJITJ. <:;1;3\_zf;(JA;;  H

wan' PETITION N0. 8323 1, oF32r_) 10  

BETWEEN:

The I)ivisi0na1l C011t1'01ie-r_ _

North East Karnataka Road' ' . .
Transport Corpoliatiolm (l\I.E7KR'E"C) 
Be11ary~Divisi011, --13el_1e11*j(. V' "

 "    

Chief Law Officer 1', b .   3.
Cemra} vOffi(:<::, 'T32-lri S'éaai1'ar:1 21 "  '  
Gtllbzirgel. _ .      . '

... Petziti i(.):"1c1'

(By Sri; ~Shivééi1.gnk&r  Manur. Adm.)

AMé1ri§,f21Tpv§§'2:..@ 7ff1'.21;51uz1121ppa

' Dis1:. Rg}.iVt:11uVI'.

Age: 1'_»/ia1j0r,--V.'C}c::c-;: Ex-(3c)11du(:t.()r
R / 0  a_1.~t.*;.1.r1}1. Tq. Ling:«,1s1.1gL1r

... 1-{0sp<)1'1C1c21'1E



 c:()Lzi1s%;l for i,f1e'}")etit;i011{:r on merits also.

 '  -.2.  é'tx1f1.fj'i' the View tliai. iiht;-'=. subject matt:e1' of tliis

  ',cip:oim00 i:1V"\?s{.i'<.N0. 83229/2010.

This W.P- is filed uncic-;=.r A1"t:ic:1
Const.it.i.1t.ion of Eridia prayirig to is;s'ue 2:1 \'g':i3iyf."-.":>(/.i£"
('.m'1.i01"ari, c;L.12is1'1iI'ig the iI1'}p11§.§l1C(i ()l'(T1L'.';i"m"'!.Qi.i'l:('Vii;__v"
31.10.2009 passed by i'.i'1L~. I")€?§)LE.vt.;\,"""..:: i..ii':I'}.,3VV{:.'}l'?'l*' 
C-O11'1I"fliSSiOI'1(?I', (}i.i1}3z11'g;§2:1--I~{egio1'121i-"CDffi7E.r:e,7_'  '
PGA Ap}')ez211 No. 27'/20()9--10 ;)1*()(ii:1ce:;:_I"iviVc1e"A1'1iié:;}{1i§{::._,g5;T1./.A
ami the order C12-11'.ec.i 31.10.2008 ;::)"2~s..$$"a:c1 
Labour C()1}1I1}iSSi()1'1Ql', Bel1z1rf¥iI.i§ix'i.sio1'1}" ~1.)iEix::Vi.i1ei:g€'1*i. in

ALC PGA CR No. 110/20Q6~»0?"p£'0:C1t,iV€fE§§f vxde;Ami=iexi.1m

B in this Writ Petition ai*"1'd'eiC'.1  j.

This petitimg '--~{:'t'.zg;'i1VV"ithscf'-:r11es1t'i'.c:~r is 1i.s1':e("i for nc..)i'1~

c:or11p1ia11c:C--iQi'r)vi'fiVt":: '(;lj_iec§'i:i.o11s. I ha-{V0 i1ezu*d t.}'11'<i*

the a' eilate authoritv aid 75l'iCVC?d bv the ()1'C1C'1" .")'c1S.'..4..t'."('i, 15?

the Ass3isi'ei1.'it I,z1E:)()1,.:1* Commis:~;im'1cér mg2.1i'(.1ii1g3_;g;:J--e--1.y;3;g'ii::_A' 

of grai'11ity. It is 1101' in dispizic l}"1z;'i't.'--t--ho 9¢;ai_<j1 ii-zp;.)'z.ivE..is

fiieci beyond the s1"aiL1i.(.)1'y pc1'i()ci 'Qf   _ 

the appellate autthority has 'ei,_<§c:lVi11e<iV" to' '.ia.A1f1i:_::1VV"'1';.{1"ii'1"' {ho

appeal. This Court in scérieé jii':i;_§n1e11t4's'Ah2is held

that under the P:~,1y1*neni.'(35Gfz1t'Vi1:ity_.}X-Q};i.§}.ii if quesn-01,1 of

extending thC:.{'1TI]C- be§y()r:1ci_} 12OVc}~:1yS aj'cic)es not arise.
Hence I al"I15'Ofi¢1;iE§.'ViE.XP\.T 't'1i1'fc-if cj'titeai.io1i1 oi" ini'.eri'ere:-ice
does 1'10}? '9aL"1V*ise.,:if,

Peiitiimfi  réjcrtftfizd .V  

:5
§€'.?§,;-"' 9"

 .....  

SW}: