!tawI' \..\r\.II\U 'Io/E I\r1I\I'Ir'\Ir"lI\.rI IIl\.a'l
' \y-_-.-"~«VNmH\' 'UPI 'VMRIWHIMNH "'1!¥\.1'N'"¥ K.\JU¥%' 'J5' l'\.#-\i'&¥'?l:f-\II*"§i'\.ul"I Fifi??? MKJUKI KJI" 7\l'\K¥'ll"¥il'\E\.5'\ T"'€WJE"V LKJUWF 1.3?' Wflfifllflifikfl l""1¥K:9£"°W%
Ix 'rm mm court or xanummm,
nawaza cams rim 03"' my ex Av<;Us.'.:f:----2c$§§T' * *
TTEZ }i0!~I'BLE Em. JUETICE
wax? BETITION 1~:o.2 :2:Vi'aoVs:2%t:-aV5_
gammy:
TIE DIVL CON'.'L'ROI.LEP.- % "
Bamamnz nzvxsxorer, :
Kmco suxmmég _.':1~£¥$0iiE man"
anmazpomz-s§s9o'2'as%__
as ITS cams}? azfrzczexu" E
cm'ma1:"Ta£xEzcE;::: . . . mrxrzcmn
{By fin' ADV 3
size. A mas:-m
t 62, '*:str '*5' -moss,
""v."---1gze:$=§;Lm;E-550026 Rmsrczmmrr
-%£A3'y-sh : 14 c BASAVARAJG, ADV 3
15% WKP. £"IIaE§ UNDER AR'I'I(§IaES 226 AND
H 22': cm ms carswxmmxeu or mnza PRAYING T0
..........~...r«..w mm-I «mum ms: mmmm "mm mmm 0? mammnm HIGH
....--. w-.
guns}; '11-m mans rnsszn BY -rx-m
smegma:-m IN REF NO. 2532004 DATED o:z,*;~«o3 ;2i5'o%4J j':"
VIBE ANX"A .
TKIS mp. IS COHIFKE
my, ms coca': mans THE .i3cz.._Lowis~z.oo4 paaaed by
the Additidimfil fit';'--¢--\1;,z:".jV:, Bangalozta in
Referenézg ." "
.. unauthcraied absence,
diamiassed from service by
I : fifgrhy-Mmmgarmnt, against: which,
the
the
the
iiz:>rI:;..jzia2:':""aoug12t at references. Tha Labour Court,
_ fi5ft9E'.'.. enquiry, crderad to reinstate
the
to his eriginnl post with ccantinuity
..}a:£ sarvica, but without baa]: wages. However,
ordered to withhold twc» increments
3%"
wi #11
cumulative aftect. This order is
czhalienge befcxze this court in thié"-._:
petition.
Heard the leazrneci ' tV2:1"¢V.~«
respective parties .
§
2
%
5
IL
0
E;
2
O
u
x
Q
2
§
fi
2
5
1"" 3|
0
P-
M
:2
O
u
:5
Q -. 1
3 4. According to.' the H¢gz:_§sge.m'a:;tx téda workman
E was unauthori;a9e':';1y'-V'*§ba'e;:1:"=fim,» 28-11-1998 to
33 8-7-1999
‘as;na.2g.3r ‘.?_08 days’, despite that
E’ the La1:ou2f~.Cntra, the learned counsel fox: the
H ‘- VA'[1=fiu}:m.itted that the wczrkman was
s.fi.fuf”n§;:i:ig from same aiitmem: and in this regard
” he.’ wéa advised to take had rest.
” 6. In the light of the ascgixments, the point
that woulci arise for ccnsideration is 3.3 tr;
mm mm: c0z}’§§ud%”§§#;§NATAKA HIGH”
_ ..,. ..nmumu.-vam- mm-H LQEJR? OF KAQNATA
&éiiberate action.
whether the iwugmd award “the
Labour Court requires intez£e:en¢fi%,f: ‘ “‘
‘2. It is seen that
The period of ahsfifi§é i§”.gndi$pfi%§&}f fh§
defence taken,_ hY,~”;§a’V $afiifian~} for his
unauthariaed ab$¢@c§wf@}£§#t fig was suffering
frszaen 5o€4é4.::E¢ilm¢f2$f ‘%?3~# A’1;§iig..’?#?£.§f;=’V’igadviaad to take
bed §e$fi, 111»-meazch till
7-7-igsg he had prociucad the
t:£§;.;t;’i;ficaaut’e~gggarding his il3.–health and from
V 5fi?§199§ he was ready and fit to report for
grtxund on which the warkman
$&md£né& absence is on accaunt of ill health
* ” us” fier the submission. made and it is not
Having regard ta the
‘ natura of ailment suffiered, taking note cf the
fact that absence was mat deliberata, the
¥\3.J
n Iff»7~.:grh.d>5″ wt =w”1wHfr”IWl*~\!\.P’i i’W\\..&H””” MMIUW’ ‘JV’ ¥\}’\N¥Vffi\iF§K§” r”‘§W.3’?”* LQJURI
Labour Court has: proceeded to wit1~.ir;k3-3;a._:”‘<:gn1y
two irzctxementa with cumulative effiféctg" 1i6w¢;vér4_
withaut back wages.
8. In the circ:t:m31§sa§§;::.na»s,A.’:i.x; {if
the award passom by’Ai.::fi§–.:.–s;:aofiz}’–aau,£t, it: is
ezrdered that ghall withhold
three i§:¢g<_.*.f:z':.s_:_;maz::.:t':"£ ' fitiva effacst .
.i'_ ;a; ;.'Llowad in past.
sal-
Iudge
~