High Court Karnataka High Court

Rangaiah vs The Registrar Of Co-Operative … on 29 July, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Rangaiah vs The Registrar Of Co-Operative … on 29 July, 2009
Author: Huluvadi G.Ramesh
 %i1I'%;;W%e:?"§' %;.W Mmmmmfiflm WWW E;m».,z«§m' fmm mmawmmwaa mmxm mwmm W? mmmwmawmm MEWW mm;Me;: M?' F:W%L2>éZN§M4§%9?%% maasm mwmm my mmmmmmmm wmw 6».

mm: wins an 29*' new or my;   --

nnronm  é

'1-as mwnm am. JUSTICf2.VI!i?ifi'i?Afl§

mrr pmrrzm':a:§';--V2o794/2oa9'(1,?és3M  

BEHEEEQ':

RANCEIAH

s/o sax.   _

mm mm ';s:s5     
R/A as   ~~?.'A'*.%  '

 

   

;. ms:   
em-Ha Imar.-:c.%      %
"  pzurmcnzm

(By kézi .:  E__ Jwv 3

" X  V  or

 * cn=+opsn.a:m:vz socmrms
.0  mmrm,
v5Ho.1, ALI mm now,
 -560001.

2 THE $33 QECRETARY,
IEERQVETAIGL $'f£*fi'1'B PRIIEARY
COWPERATIVE AGRICULTURAI:
ARI} RURAL DEViL€JF&~l"£' BAHK
LTD. , $l.'P"LOYE;E cmm CADRE



as «rem-a-1:

»  W  mm %jw,?i«*F%$!§"fiLE W mmzwmm. W»::..:w*~§ mum W mgrmwmm WW mmw W mmmmm WW2 ammm W mmzzimm WWW

nmam:.om-560013  

{By an .-. Jasmma zmmamrr.  

sin: 9 2. rnnmsa, mv»r«on;"'8§'I"I'Is"E*vvt!:£i.E'§ smwm
or rm 2s'rI1'xm9¢Exi%'.»;accor<r2aa1ccn W111!
1':-m pmvxsxms orV_ s;c*1fI5m--"'4,i% '~bi1.~§ f2:m Pram or
smmrrr,  :§.%9'z2 a.1?iIéI;~ 'sz'1'r::.m«r1' mm
was    mm at nm
   mm m-

  §E;'%2;.% on E03. mnnmmr
  ms mt, tum comer mm

ORBER

 Ipatitian, tha potitianoz: is

 AA Taaékfing for iaauanae af an writ of mandnmua
H 'V..*':¥"':'% mmmw U?" Kflfiwflfiflfifl MEWN %

the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 

settlement that was pxnvazuinq an 4_

or the retirement or tho.pati4t1cfi$§'j;".'T'.'fi%"    

2. The petitioner:  
31-3-2002    £.m. },.  at
auperanmxatien.   with the
sacmui  at the time
of      paid gratuity

equi-wa.1:§n;£  According to the

'pefiitiénfifi'fijhwa =;§h  iantitlud to 20 months

oquivfilgint gratuity am pm: the Payment:

 E_:$:§tx3gity..__...Act, 1972 as Amendad by Act
' ;.V"'11AfvJ,:9~9§s:f:¢':1E_ the Payment of Gratuity Act stating

 in applicabla to him as this

éanfzgdjy act is man borwfiaial to the owloryco

L'  'Hausa to: tan :r.-nauscxx that tbs Central. Act

 »"§H1:sva.i1s over: the state Act when berth cf them

deal with a particular subject. In this

xagazd. the §etitionu:: said to have given

W



rcpmscmzatioms to tho 2"' respondent. 

the reawudonm-Authatitioa have not

decision to aottls his banezitg, ‘

ii! filed.

3. Heard tbs the

respective partie’ s’.’

4. petitions: _

‘B:L#:i:sion Sench reported

in #1 the case of mm

§tJ’JNfi-IA %~§-e. v:E”2R!I’ILI3E!¥.S & crwans

…. A1~w’.l’I-M. as well an an

mutt. when the petitions:

on 31-3-2002, the

‘to the Gratuity Act, which aama into

V’ 1998 is applicable to the can or

Atfaefl petitioner: at: the time of aattling tha

As such the rapandamts-Authoritins

mwwmma vww wr<wwm:.wéMx&Mwe.£%, ma."-;«a°~a WE” i%,§«%;§ww:mu-é%;§<2$~%. M§%;;s»m §;;€;Mm"K W" gmwmmm. Hmm KQUW KW %'&W%Mi&Wa Méfiw ¢i'."1'®Em§%"%" WW E{fi.&§'%§%"§'a%%fia §*%%@§"€ 4

ought {:0 have nettle the benefits as per the

W

entitlement and also as per: the

By virtue cf the manénentg the

01 gratuity payab1a .~~~ 3.; hg1' g3 V"g,«'d:_: fig.

113.3, 50,600/- 'and that}; %%'&p%¢:é:m&%% .:",va€l.VV1tV{:*~..j:q'v§;z§z§u"a

ratirad utter the émgnqmaat egg; ififiagroréé
are entitled to… .' 'in-..v:iEow or the
time, the by the
patitiansx at Ap#§g§x§§¢;§§-¢5fi§ida:ad by tbs
sacond; accordance with

law «Eat . 5i%%a1ii§a 1':.'" <

5.. -j!:4V1:.’3,7sv«::§atit:ix1 is allawad in
o#&6r…..§aaacd by the Full Bench cf
£a1§Teau2g*;e§bztea in ILa 2003 Run ¢s5s.

§3éhfl€
Iuhhge

mph;/–*

mwmmm WE” §%m&M§%.m%&%¥m%l% %~§?é%,M”§ fi..m*:%:;m Ur mmmmgmm Méwm mwmw aw §¥é;fi’5§TKE”§§émK§R¥’§§V’§1m§*. §”%§%;§l?”*.! QM.-W§’§1,.JJ?l%ll ms” .w»r«m%mu.«mam wzwm wmwm W?* wamwmgwmw mwm Ia.