High Court Karnataka High Court

The Assistnat Director vs Kamalamma on 5 August, 2009

Karnataka High Court
The Assistnat Director vs Kamalamma on 5 August, 2009
Author: Huluvadi G.Ramesh
..,,...........w. r1n.3i"1 wum Ur xm+:mAw

BEFORE-'

THE fi0N'BLE MR. Juswxés év:UfiAai.¢_R$§:$fi 

WRIT PETITION "90'i--5_/200?' {L-*\'£°ER}

war: PET:T:bsVnm;7e53{éQ0é"*w'

BETfiEEN: ~~T-' f;} *;g_>_

w P_Hb ?853'33,2008
ram AssIsTNAT'§ZREcTGR~* " »*«W,

OE' sEI#.I<:tr1;«t:*r3~3,E;:;_V__«.'_ *      .
GGVERNMEN? MBflERN"GRfiiflfifiE,"g°
MADDUR,"§fiRDYA?nISTRECTL~-__;.. PETITIORER

{By 5:: ;'sA$ga$EsH Q ?AfiIL, Rfifii

1.

_3§naLAu&h. A
g%!$»R&£IYfiI§H;

‘n,¢H%HAHfiALLI vznnass,

A *V_xa5n3a”a¢3L:,xannUn
,’x$AL§x,gm§n2A nzswazcr.

2 aEsamm”xnIsH: ABHIRUBDI
‘. AY§K?HfiRU Ana RESHKE
,~ «HIEDESHRKERA Kasncasxr,

‘ ._5?H F190R,K.3.BUIL£IRG,

“bR.anBEnKh£ VEEEHI,
Bafififilfikfi-01,

..,m..,…m,.. mm a.,mux’! or mmmmm Haw comm or? MRNATAKXWWWW

Hifii-E

3 R.ES}% UPA HIRDE
SARAKARI MAISAARI

BITTANE KOTI, MARDYA. … RE$§a§§fiR?$=_

(Ry Sxi/Smt : v.s.NmIx AND MmNJ3§A_§ff, V .
KULAKARNI, Ayvs FOR R1y»R3 gun as SDI} *,

rgzs w? FILED uxpEa’ng?:cLz9Vé;6 n$fi”227
or THE cowsmxrurxcw mi Ififlik 2RA$:fis id QnAéH
THE aasnn nw.5,9.2oQa;a2§ssEb’Bx.zfin IABOUR
C$URT, MYSORE IfiTagf3Rg¢E,M§;§9I97, VIBE ARN-
A, Br ALOWING m$;s_w§@f .W”” ”

?’§ #]9 $§ éfiié d? 200?

SET KBNALAHHA — *&g,=% »1=.’-
A333 An03T’46’2EAasJ=_’,fn_.

W/O NARIYAIAH, – ‘< *5 .'
cnanananaznz v:LLnaz. %

KASABA HQBEI. fiasnyn maavx
ANB¥A 313:, ,_ ;;u~PETxT:cNEa

(3yfs:if5m: :Tfi:s NAIR & HANJUA N K$LKRRNI,
*.=?. *7%_v§fiDVS 3

A gJKVC l 5TfiE ESSESTAN? nxagcwon

_ 0E 8ERICULTURE

–F_ “G0?EENKENT nonsam eaaznagz
T% ummnn3a, unnnya nxsr.

W

E
2
I
Q
E
;z
x

2 ass:-M K2191-:1: ABHIVRIIDDI
A U 5. ans:-Hm Nxmzsmrmm-«j”‘«V__”–«.

mcmmax, rim mwx, M 5 BUIL£§E}$€:3;.___;:

DR AHBEDKAR VEEDHI
BERG-ALORE-1 .

3 RESHM3 UPA mRnzs}m§{A1a:§’ j;
smamaz mum: BITTAN1-E ” 1. _ , ”
KGTI, KANBYA. _ ..’;A_RESPO?.*IDg:.”fNT. _S

(By 5:1: samamzsn cé”%’§A»T:L,

arms 99:2 Aégzicrms 226 mm 227
:32′ ms <::oz;s'rItmm:d1~;- 93' "'::='RA¥:NG TO QUASH
trim AwAf33"'T;vT.L§S3As$:._EIz} – $r" COURT, m
I.9.NQ~.'5§;.iév§I*z .:D:fj3._§";.9Qfzssfge,' 'mm cgazrzrrgn cow
or _2a<jnI§::s'r;…..;mir.EwITH Arm MARKED AS

ARNEX-gig Exfmm I Tm PETITIGNER IS
AGGRIEVEEIJ -Am: mm RES?0NDEN'I'S TO
REINSATE 53:12 – EE'rIi*.iGI€'éR IN HER ORIGINAL ms?

WIT;-3j,._%jA:'ii01*3"I'II*I1I5'I'3.*Y"__ '''' gs' SERVICE AND Ani. cm-ma
Coxéfiavfiégwim. BENEFZTE.

'WW ………….. wwu Us" IsAKNA'¥'AKA 2:-new COURT or KARNAYAKA mm: comm 0% tea

ARE ccmrm an FOR PF.EL2£"Hl1*IARY

_msA.1im:-:. ,.u"z'1~;?'*3' @3039 731-115 mar, mm wtmtr mm

4. ; % ~ . Fonmmxa:

‘-V~ov|”Vmi’|”%* W mm-wmm mum count 0? KARNATAKA HIGH:

Labour Court ought not to have antertaifiad the
matter and corwensation ought not $23331

awaxrded .

4. Per cantra,
for the workman na§1¥
¢::c>mplia:m’:e of of tha
Industxial £)isp1:§%’1_:’§ .é;_V The Laban:
Cauxtt hag had worked for
maze noted that several
by the werkman fram
that rm actian has been
tglgen _ t:Z’1e5:- §£;§’S§;.’V>ndent-Autharity. A3 such;

up her mind ta mava the

” uz Authazritiee and a refezzence

“s;g§@5 ggfigjhi dmcing 199? stating that the Labour

Co11xfi:’:.ought ta: have: erdered far rainstatemant

alas stated that the cetmzgzenaaticn awarded

is very meagsr.

cu’1I\!wn”*aI.W\?\,l’-M rungs-r “gum; U?’ fiANNmiAKA

comanaaticn has been enhanced to Rs.25}QQO/-.

Accordingly, tha patition. filedW .§§ § the

Govarnent ia dismisaed and the pet§tiQ$ files _

by the wvrkman ia all¢wed ifi”part;’ J

The ra3pandentaTa sha;i= € figffl thé
ccmensation, within fifib métfiha ffnm the date
of receipt cf a copy fit £515 Qxfiax.

sal-

Iudge