High Court Karnataka High Court

Basavaraj S vs The Managing Director Shones … on 16 October, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Basavaraj S vs The Managing Director Shones … on 16 October, 2008
Author: H N Das
sen COURT or mmmnm HIGH cgum" or KARNAYAKA HIGH COURT or KARNATAKA HIGH ceumr or KARNATAKA HIGH COURT or KARNATAKA MGE-I c

IR' 'EH3 HIGH CE3€IR'.l' 09' KRRIIRTIQG5, BANGAIDKE

narmza ms 1'15 16" mm or ocmnm 2oo13 k~HH«:'%:'..,M

BEFORE

THE I~IGN'BLE rm. warren    

war: zrn-rmxarzw :¢o.1o319/V1200?£1.-¥wfi1a§i   H'

EETWSBQ

msmama s

sic sxnmmmmm... « u 

AGED Ancm so    " '
zzxm are-.1213. 1 A    
am: GIl$5S.»A'--3LV1'1'I-I:-'1'!"2?-':1'l}1';«    

  A  " 

nnnsnxfg-M' 5;{$_c_:;_ 194%;    1+  V' firxnoaazn

1 'mm  hzmcm
91-1:31:23 "t."..'§'_'fi'If2'H sssrrnn WI 1.11:
Né§::.:rs22. §;'!T1'I-I mm,
=;r;EH;H1~ma3 22an»H"s":msn,

 A2-mewim puma
 raw nssomms.
:~r«:z.1§22, mm mm,
s.r=..fii'AeAn, znn srmm.

M   ' . "

 " Hjagmsazoaz ':9. .. . nssmrzmnrs

(BY SR1 S V SHJ3L8'§'.I.. REV.)

THIS URI'? P!}'I'3."I.'Ifi*3' I8 EILED UNDER AMICIE

 A"'-H226 am 22': or may cmxmrw or mm

P'RhYI1»13 CID QUASI-I TEN!' PART OF THE AWARD
EOLDINE Tiififl' TEE PETITICINE. W33 NUT A %.!€!'EI'I
P55 E55559 III I.I3.NG.35!'2w4 BY THE PRINCEPAL

r71~'*"'N



mm a uvuni vr nnnmnaniwu ruun yuuxi Ur KAKNAIAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH I

IABGUB. COURT,  RE DH 18 . 10 . ZOOS VIBE
RENE}! . A . am» IDIBBCT THE RES PONDSIHTS TO
REIKETETK 'I'H£ BETITIQWER TO EH 5 2703133 

WITH *CDH'£1I'T€¥ITY $2' SERVICE AHD BECK 
ALL $2'!-IER cwsnqvmrxaz. BENEFITS A V 3
xzcmesmw AS PRAYEI3 5133 IN '1'!-E DISP'U'I'E__.,«   '

ms sum': wrxwxou    
smxzaszazmpcz IEARING mrs nmr;-.% ms " _z=:a§s,'a;:'*

'£1-E mmmnm: > %
:3 B. n 

In this unit p§§:#=?i%§«9;3,a;§:., ma
prayud fax a wgif in t§§ #afig%§ §f7§ertioxuri
to quash gnu}  ij : a g 16.2ooe in m
m.35,*2u.f;mA1_   court, at
Bangalogg ,*%i&mi§a;hfi w_ths claim ¢f the

pititionérafiainiy fin §§fi ground that he is not

._a wozfihén as fiéfiinpfl under aectimn 2£a)of the

§;Péfifiannr acntands that he was working

H  §$"a,uP£¢ject Engineer and withaut notice,
' V£ wi£§§fifi anquiry and u1th¢ut camglying thc
T r§i6#iaiana ¢f section 25! of tha In act, the

.u§aspondanta terminated him fram service on

2.5.2904

. aggrieved by this taxminatian, the

a»~>*””

iGH COURT OF KARNATAKA mom cquxr or KARNATAKA HIGH coumr or KARNATAKA men COURT or KARNATAKA I-HG!-I COURT or KARNATAKA I-HGH C

potitianer raiaed a. dispute batcre tho Labour

Gaunt in ID 1~3’¢:~.35/2004 undcr Se<::tien 10 dhfefi

the Ia Act. Borers than Labour: 3
patitione: filed his claim ntmtment = M

raapandcnts have: tiled th£iii§""at§xtema§ rit_

arhj octi one .

3.0:: the basis ” “the

Laban: Court fraanad the; issues

for its aanaid§avrex§;Lian:::A__ 3;

party is
an

the firm: paxty

. ;:::!.§fies in a. workman under

sadéad parties as per

*3m;.ae:;a:é; Sacticm 2:53 at the ID
315%? V

‘3’.’mxat:na..-: he further pravaa
ha is arbitrarily terminated
ffzom. service w.e..f. 2.5.2004?

4. Ta what relief the first party is

V’ entitled?

(9_\5\Jv

we-2 v…umu ur Mummmm Hum-I aguuxz or KARNAIAKA H16-H Ccmm (JP KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HEGH COURY OF KARNATAKA HIGH C

contamiad. that that potitionaz: was disczuzzging

his duties, which are mainly in than nntu:e.T-1:1′:

managerial and administrative, and he 2 .
a wazrlhnan as defined under Section. 2 I’ ‘

ID Act. As against this pxaaaiuga an a§i¢eg¢§ ;

is placed on racoxrd _to ‘~

petitioner: was exurcisinsafl’man@’e#iai.:
mm-supervisary ‘ VV”p6;¢ara .

more in no widens? $ that
than othax: §a:u§.Jgjk3ya:;a:a ‘.T.éa:’~. fih¢..__..:V.T’1§¢apon::a::xta-
eatabliahmé?#t”;:.”‘v%é’i#~– ‘hupervision and
cant}:-91:’ ” hit” :7′; Further ma
mutexiai’-.:i;a that the petitioner

was gjiven “‘t2§£V. g>a§am£:””‘ ta sanction leave to

fag: pgrbtaéfiian to take action against
aomit misconduct etc. In

‘#211’ any such evidence on record,
J Lfififiéur Court comitted an error in
‘=§§n§;fiaing that thn petitions: is not a

. as defined undcr Eaction 2(3) of tha

LID net. This csonczlusicm of the Labour: court

is century to this evidence on recazd and also

(WM

Mn uuum wr hflflflfilfiikfl 11:1.-ii-I k;f,xL¥{(i Ur KAKNAEAKR HEGH COURT OF KARNATAKA WGH COURT OF KARNATAKA MGM COURT G KARNAINCA HIGH C

that law established. by this Cam-:t and the Apex
Court. Dn this ground the imugned awa1:dg’~:£ a
liable ta be qumhad. %% %

7. 34:1: the reasons

fa}. lasing :

Than writ patifgiqxn
The impugned maze: j%1e%L;.ié\;v@ae in m
Ne.35.r2cm Court in
herebf is zwnded to
the disposal in

a¢co.rdn:;<:§ * ="a:t'1:¢r providing an

oppertsmi hxstzii parting .

Sd/-E