- 1 -
IN THE HIGH CORT OF KARNh$AKA A3 BAGLGE
BATES THIS THE 6"'£fl¥ 05 MARCH, 2o09*fVfi
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE s;A2auL N$éE$R H ;'
WRIT PETITION NO.707 OF 205? (s;REs§_ 7'u*"
BETWEEN:
SR1 3 D EAsANDAVAR','x
3/0 LATE DHARMAPEA "
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS w_ _ d_, V' »
R/AT D.NO 11, BUILDING &0_52;, '*
2ND FLOOR, KHB}eoL9my;_' ._"'*w~
NETHAJI NA§ARA;=Vg' _,'»V* =' *
KENGERI SATELLETE TOWN} "" ;
BANGALORE*v 560G§G Tfi m mnw I'D'! r1"!/'\V" :'v".'-r1'r\n rnt'l.'r= "
::n..n.L ":1 Lu 3J..L1'\1.I.I 1 J.111.1.a V;'.wiA" ..L\.J -_\.vJ_:L'aI'H.\--V'1",_l.;', J..E.,1.I.I
BENEFITS THE PETITIONER IS ENTITLED TQ\UEEEE
THE VOLUNTARY RETIREMENT EEHEME OE THE E1 FE
EARLY .AS POSSIBLE. gAT HEX -EEEE WITHIN' ONE
MONTH FROM THE DATE'QE~DISEoSEE»SE THE APPEALS
PENDING BEFORE THE E2 EE0EE=wiTH INTEREST AT
18% FROM THE BATE THE_HMoUET'BECEEE EUE TILL
THE ACTUAL DATE OF EAYHEHT,*;;_ .
THIS ;EHIT3~{9ETITIoN"5 COMING ON FOR
PRELIMINARY xHEEEIEt;,*E?T"GEoEE"TEIE BAY, THE
CGURT BEE ES THE EEELQETEE: w
E 1:
I hafEHheaEé_the learned Counsel for the
~"fl3rtiéS.I., ~E-tH. EEEEE
"H2; "TEE; Eétitioner contends that he had
k, been a.wbEking with the Karnataka Agra
».'Indu$tTies Corporation Ltd., Bangalore as
"gV=EE§gty Manager. He retired from services on
'Vlé;l2.2OO3 as per the Voluntary' Retigement
Scheme dated 5.9.2003. However, his retiral
and pensionary benefits have Vnot * been
disbursed within the period presorioed in tne .
scheme.
3. From the material on record it_apneereT
that after conducting die¢iplinary'broceedings
against the petitionernlo£dere_of punishment
were passed against him as per the orders at
Annexureefg }pf, is? age fF5"deted 23.10.2003,
25.l0.2flQ3ei§§ndeoil?.l2.§GO3 respectively.
Fetitioner has filed an appeal challenging the
said éeders=befc:e the Board of Directors as
pe;"AnnekureEfi.l Though, the said appeal was
'i'file§ on 24.12.2003, the Appellate Authority
"_hes not_eonsidered the same. Therefore, he
hes .fiiée this writ petition seeking the
anfollowing reliefs:
{1} Issue writ in the nature of
Mandamus directing the 1"'
respondent to clear all the
:
it
-5…
(4) Award Cost of thie writ petition
to the petitioner, in the wi~i
interest of justice and equity; «fa 2
:3′:-
Sri B.G.Sridharan, ;leerned* senior _r
counsel appearing for the petitionerl would’
contend that though the petitioner hoe retired
on 18.12.2003 as per the fieiunréry Retirement
Scheme of the Afiorporetionflitknneefiremc). the
retiral and peneionery henefite give not been
settled under the
scheme.:fi iiii “:£Wy;g §fQrt#er_’oontended that the
orders ho§”V §ufi§s5eefit* imfioeed by the
Corporation egainst the petitioner is without
:hany_h3efe end retitioner has challenged the
seme-g ee£e;eT; the Appellate Authority’ on
‘ii24.l2:2OQ3’eho Appellate Authority has failed
“”Whto”eonsider the said appeal. Because of the
iihaotion on the part of the Appellate
flflutnority, petitioner has put to untold
Ahhardship. Though the retitioner retired on
m._.n,«_-V…
-5-
18.12.2303, the Corporation has not paid
retiral and pensinary benefits to Fxtheg
petitioners.
5. On the other hand, 1¢a;n¢a’c¢ans¢; for 5
the respondent~CorporatiohVeubmits that Sinée
the petitioner has_ suffiered_ the ordere of
punishment, the Coreoratiohf hae; mat settled
retiral and pensioner? bgnefite.3r
6. It is Eoleare from xthe” materials on
record that tfifig fietitioher’ had retired from
service; as_1éhgw;e,1gb2Qo3; It is also an
admitted ‘,fact*.Vth$tkd”the petitioner has
ohailehqed the “orders of punishment passed
afiaoeihét hid by filing an appeal on 24.12.2083
<Annexero%a5;]~which is pending before the
Vappellate Authority. In the circumstances, I
édtddireot the Appellate Authority of the 1"'
:Resoondent ~ Corporation to dispose of the
méppeal within a period of eight weeks from the
'\
-7…
date of receipt of copy of this order.fWfifiKA
petition is disposed of accordingly. Nfi:cQ$t£;”
ICLY/’