High Court Karnataka High Court

A S Vasanthiamma vs The Steel Authority Of India on 30 October, 2008

Karnataka High Court
A S Vasanthiamma vs The Steel Authority Of India on 30 October, 2008
Author: Anand Byrareddy
2
20.12.2006 passed by {he respondent wide Annexurt: A and in

dimer the respondent ts continue the petiticners { .i23_ the
cmpluymcnt til} the age oI’60 ytxars.

This ‘Writ Petition coming on for Grdcrs fillies-ji:’ay,.

made the following: — _. W .. __

The Cutmsei for .l,i;v;::’»’r;’«.Spt)ndt:nl have filed

3 Joint Memo to {jut ui’Courl in the

folluwing lermfi” ‘

“F’i:’»s’£.Ii’jé3porzder:t harem

V ._ f}iaAiViVLV<3§?£!:vfé I E?x.§_§'}££¢}r:«.efs In the above: matter.

barriisg Nayalc at $1. No.2,'

m;;e;:a;a:g:pp;2 at 3:. Nb. 5; smr. H. 5:

Sl. No. 6; Sim'. A. S'.

§f§2sarr:}1@urrzrr:a at Sl. No. 12 and Smt.

xtiary at .S’E.No.J3 in the cause title

_ the atfzer petirimers waif! be take» cm

fire roiis of the First Resparidem’ ejfezrtiue

. fivrr: t?Ix’04f2003 and {hat their pay will be

apprqzkriarely fxeacl notionaliy fr: S4 Grade

in the First Respcmdcmt Company wiih effect
fi’0ffi 0543412003.

6

5
shelf {)2

csrrrtirruecz’ and fiérther accruaf wiii be as per

Firs: Resgxmderit Compcrriy

rules ofthe F’ir.s’t Respzmderzt Company fram .: _
the date qfreporting in 3-4 Grade in £:¥ze__ ‘ –~ :_.

Resyiondenr com,m,;: .. ferrrzfi “uf this T’.»,f¢_::i

Memo ofCompremise. _ – _ _ –

It is furikezr     fiéreirr that
in view. af   the

Pet;?ié)?;:2:’ ‘Q! 1:5″ tégéhaazsezi title fir: the

éibosgé. F§;1\?i;¢g’.- zéieceased, ‘ his

‘ ‘sészzéfig be entitled for
._ arzl}? béfxgfits as agreed upon in this

” .VV_compi-o:h:’sé -,rie_:=i:’.t__i.¢§;>;”}.e. Providem’ Fzznd arm’

Ci:*:3;’1zie;;2 as ;A);3=rVfr§i£es af the First Resgxyndem’

cgompémy.¢2t1..rs0tior:al{vf’Lxir2g his salary in 85-

_V fivm 0I.{}¢.20G3. A::cor’d:’r§gly they
Z .§§r~a%’.T’Va=rr’2’iitlec1? fin’ payment under Lifia Cover

ortiy. The L135 of hire DJ’. .Hor:gya

Nayaic skull :40: be erttitled it) any other

benefit like emphatflierrt and any ether
bemeflts frem the Firs1’Resp0r£a’et?f Campariy.

It is agreed that in the case af Shri. K.
Maheshwaraggm at Sl. No. 5; Sim’. H. K.
Yasfwda at Si. 6; Smt. A. S’.

6

I/asarttiriyexrnrmi at SI. .:Vz:.*. I2 and Smt.
Ubagaramary at Sl. No. 13, since
retired on 30,m:2o0s,- 3;.mx2cz2§s,- ‘ ‘

some/2007 and 30/0932006 ‘i*e.§j}e.ctisx2§y§.-“.t.c§t:” ‘
having attained the agaé_§_)fsu;)efa;er;aatiem it

58 years, it is *v..t11’e:tL these’ –fi}1tf’,:§

Petitioners Vsxitttff _ be ;;_e£itit£ec’I.’VJ only
rrronetary berrefitfi arid
Grqtuéy ‘en Eat???.britfzfi0rI§ii”bfi.!?£;?§’iOtE’ ef sctiiiry
.{..»g–‘ 34.’ §t§aJe;’ Wt:1…e}§$éc:§i.fi-em53.04.2003.

The this para are

ff}:;V’1’tz:;é:2ii_’2fer:t Futia’ and Gratuity as

A “pe*r’V the gmd Rates for the period

It the date of attamtrig 60

,5. ‘

i it years ~. Further they st’-tail riot be
i E eiititiecifetiiiergxt other benefits fer the period
t péiggr Orflem 01.04.2003.

further’ agreed between the parties

herein that in the ease of Smt. ,4. S.

V:3’Sai’iI}’2iyarfiffiG, has agreed to wt’t%tdraw the
Petitieri filed by her in WP. No. I 6093f20€3?’,
pertdirrg on the files of this Hon 7238 Cc-wt in
view eftitis compromise rezxeked between her
arm’ the First Respomfertt. Sirniiargv Smt.

Ubagara 1’i«f¢?f’_§fi to withdraw the p=etitionfi£ed

6

. pg _

£w%HnWRNa&fimM%mM&m£fi§gL °i
Yaskeada to withdraw the pefirioz:
in WP. ;Vz}. 2866zi’006per:££g’r:g g;-r1 )” .£Ez§,§ ” ” ‘
carrtpramise rtaezcfteaf

F:’rst Resporufegrt, ”

The memo is piaccd on !T§§U(ifd;

Hence, (In; p£:;tViV_iiun ‘terms of the above

faint Memo. ‘ V

Sd/~
Judge