High Court Karnataka High Court

Smt Nagarathnamma W/O. Late … vs Union Of India Rep By Its Secretary on 2 November, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Smt Nagarathnamma W/O. Late … vs Union Of India Rep By Its Secretary on 2 November, 2009
Author: Ram Mohan Reddy
IN T HE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA. BANGALORE

DATE» Tms THE 2ND SAY OF NOVEMBER, 

BEFORE

THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE  MoHArIi'12E2::mY _: ' ~ 

WRIT PETITION No.9312'aOFT'_'_'2:{50§'~§L~§F1" 

BETWEEN

SMT. NAGARATHNAMMA. 
W/O. LATE I)OI)I)EOOW'D_A, 
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS; ~ . -

NO.4»30. ISTCROSS. RMV1'IST?XOE, 

G}'1'.DDALAHALLI_,"BANGALO--F{E3--94j=, _     " . PETITIONER.

{M /S. A. C.QpI}I--?{R;-i§§1¢SIIj_&E:S;"'ADvS.)

AND:

1. UNION._OI5V'INI:«I.A;»I " O

REPFlES«EN'TE[}. I3~.Y'I .  'O"'---'OOECRETARY.
IV[INIS'1TE§YI OF*LABOU'R--.  N Ew DELHI.

2. IVI.' ASHWA"ITEINARAYANA,
-Ai3SI.S'FANT PF"CQ.EV1'MlSSIONER {PRO},

  EI>F"'IOI?.C;A._I\IIzAI*ION (MINISTRY OF LABOUR),

 'OOv.ERI\'iM'EI\IT OF INDIA. KARNATAKA REGION.

. '5'BHAVi«SxHY;A.N'IDHI BHAVAN.

3 NO. 13;  RAMMOHAN ROY ROAD,
'I?.B.,.IIO..2~5S4. BANOALORE560 025.

 3, T}-IEJZJIRECTOR.

' '1s;ARI\IATAI<:A STATE TOURISM

"  O~EPARTMEN'I' CORPORATION LTD.

NO.10/4, KASTURBA ROAD.
METRA TOWERS. QUEEN'S CIRCLE.
BANGALORE} .} .

bi



4. THE; COMMESIONER.
BANGALORE MAE-{ANAGARA PALIKE.
CORPORATION CIRCLE}.
BANGALORE.

(SMT. PREMA 1~iATI'L cosc FOR R4.  *  
SMT. VIJAYA R. HANUMANTHAGOD. ADV. 1'«-'OR 
SR1. LG. GACHCHINAMATH.A.DV.1?OR~R3.   »
SR1. BL. SANJEEV,ADV. FOR R3.   j; 

SR1. G.SHANTHAPPA. ADV. FOR R4:  '

THIS PETITION I«'1LEo'U:Nt)_ER OART1~eI;'E 212'e1wV&-':227*w O'

OF THE CONSTITUTION OF Il\"D.lA_PRA'.?IN'GTO;: QUASH
CLAUSE (7) OF THE 11v1Puo1§:Er)"..I,E<rfrER'DATED 22-10"
2007. VIDE ANNEXURE,§_ll AND ETe,_V 

THIS PETITION, _CV(jl'P»/.1VVII'O.J'V_CV?Vx:()l\¥~~.l?'("5R__ETJRLHEARING.
IN 'B' ORoUP,fr_1~113' E)A'.{ THjfE,_ COURT MADE THE

 by name Doddegowda died
while in he1rnes'sléieA' auE3eeOnd Division Clerk in the 3"!

respjonclent ~34 AAKerna"ii.aka State Tourism Development

. C'orpO1_fa»tion;'-.. pursuant to which the petitioner was paid

O.all.--..Vtet9'tni'1!al*li,'Benefits by the 3"-'1 respondent. The

peti’tion.er””having made an application to the 2m;

A fespondent for release of the monies under the

Employees’ Provident Funde and Miscellaneous

llftti

. .. R1.«:si->Owf1f)ENf1fee,

make payment, to the petitioner, of all the benefits of

2. Learned eounsel for the 3″” respondent. ~

KSTDC, the employer of the deceased Dasegourda

submits that consequent upon the
employee, his widow, the pet,itioner_ he_1’ein’* ”
over ali the terminal benefits. If ;t.hai§_’_’is’i’so;._there:e$i.n.ti€::

no more doubt that the emiplvoyee n_amed’iDo§d'(1egoiNda

is since deceased entitling “to-.thei§benefits
of Provident Fund. the mere
wrong entry of the deceased in
the Death’ bfascéowda instead of
be Corrected in a
proceetiing of Births and Deaths

Aet,_n_everithe_1ess’vfor’._§}5e7purp0se Of disbursement of the

‘Fpundidofdeeeased Doddegowda, the petitioner

” has VI;i1Etd.C “out ease.

that View of the matter, the 21″” respondent ~

A Asisistant Provident. Fund Commissioner is directed to

iii

Provident Fund due and payable to late Docldegowda,
without any further clarification. With regard to the
change of the name of the father of the deceased

recorded as Dasegowda to Dasegowcla alias Govirididppav,

in the Death Certificate. it is for the

institute such proceedings as isrr*’perrn.issib1eVIV*in’.1aw;._ it

more appropriately the Registrati:o_hA’ot

Deaths Act, 1969.

Petition is accordingly or–de”red’.–~.._