Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Integrated with over 4 crore judgments and laws — designed for legal practitioners, researchers, students and institutions

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Karnataka Co Op Milk Producers ... vs S.Sunder Ram on 3 February, 2012

Bench: Dilip B.Bhosale, L.Narayana Swamy

W

"  4(B1Y°SR-IV._ M;R.C. RA\/'I';'ADv.,)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT B_A"NCGAI.OR.E.w A
DATED THIS THE 3" DAY OfFCFEBR!JA'R_Y' 20172..' 

PRESENT 

THE HON'BLE MR'.T.jU.STICE'v-DILIP E§»v.BAH«;€_)VSALE"

THE HON'BLE MR. JU«STfI"CE"L.,NARAYAN.AISWAMY

W.A.NOS.871 O-E 2O'I0:' BI 2_7_'7'B};77 'OE 2010(S-R)
  _ V;-C/w   CV " 
 *_-WA ;;NO:,.8..7'& OVE"~2_D1VVQ(SV§R

IN W.A.NQS'. Bv711;'lf§0*;'10' zég 2776-77/A2019» 
BETWEEN'_ '     

I<ARNAT'AI<AfC;O.OF%: rvIILI<gR-RODU"C'E'R'S

FEDERATION'LIM.IT'E.D    j

KMF C*OM'RLE'><,_ CEV'NTRAL'QF'FI_CE

DR. M.H'._MARIGOwD'A ROAD"

BANGALORE --. 560 02.9". 

REP; BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR ...APPELLANT
«I '~ "= (COMMON)

 . AN D  

K1. "SR1. S-.LjSU'NDER RAM
S/O; 'LATE S.N. SHAMA RAO
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS
NO,..:", BASAPPA LAYOUT

A' '*-._GAvIRURAM E><TN.

BANGALORE -- 560 019.

 "SR1. B. CHANDRASHEKARA

S/O. LATE B. BETTAIAH

AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS

NO.1, BYRAvESHwARA NILAYA
RAGHAVENDRA COLONY, 19" MAIN



W

(BY S RI. T. P. RAJ E N D RA""I<U MAR SU N G'AYj, .AD.\./_ I ,)

K)

BTM LAYOUT, 1" STAGE   ..
BANGALORE -- 560 029.

. SR1. M.S. NARASE GOWDA

S/O. LATE SANJEEVE GOWDA

AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS 

NO. 383/A, 15* MAIN, SFS--4Q7'~._

4" PHASE, YELAHANKA NEW TOWN I 
BANGALORE -- 560 6.4.  _  ..F<ESPONDENTS

'"~ ' " ' (COMMON)

THESE; vv;«.A;<--. ARE gF.TIL:ED<. "U'N,'D.ER:',i'SECTION 4 OF THE
KARNAT_AK_A H_j1'G,H COURT ACT-PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE

ORDER? PASSED TN .T'HiE-.wRI,T,f-- PETITION NOS. 7930-32/2009
DATED 2Y0.v.c--1:;.,2,Q1o._, V  ~ 

IN'"v_v.A,'NO.:8i;._OR   '
BETvv'EEN:_ V'  '  '

;'r<AR_NATAi~<A_ 'CO'.OP'MILI< PRODUCERS
y'-'EEDERATION"-LIM.I.TED
I  KMFCOMPLEX, CENTRAL OFFICE
" ~ _ DR. 'M.'i4._. 'MARIGOWDA ROAD
 'BA_NGA'LORE1..-- 560 029.
'--._REP; BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR ...ARRELLANT

(_BY*S_R'I. M.R.C. RAVI, ADv.,)

AND "

A' '*-._SRI. H.M. RUDRAIAH
__3/O. LATE H.R. MURUGAIAH
AGED 59 YEARS

NO.171, 2"" BLOCK, JAYARAM LAYOUT
BANNERGHATTA,
BANGALORE--S6O O83.
...RESPONDENT



3
(BY SRI. T.P.RAJENDRA KUMAR SUNGAY, ADV.,)

THIS W.A. FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARD\l/¥\TAKA

HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING To SET ASIDE THE ORDEDRERASSVVED

IN THE WRIT PETITION NO. 19219/2009 DATEO 'i-3;.0v2jj;20i'10.C' 

THESE W.As. COMING ON :'FOR_"'QF<D«E»R.SA}'"TH'EVTC0U.RT

DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:7 

PC:

These writ appeal__s*  the order
dated  Single Judge in
 orders payment of
baCkv.'a'gve,sV'g:to  the period between the

 re:ieviriEgLaEwnd"t.he date of their reinstatement.

 2. The."'ord'erTdated 20.1.2012 passed by the

  igleatrniend Single reads thus:

a?? 

ORDER

T'In the light of the order dated *0 ,Vi1.3.01.2010 in W.P.No.19219/2009 in the Case of H.M.RUDRAIAH --vs- STATE OF KARNATAKA & OTHERS, the petitioners are entitled to Continue to serve the respondent - Co--operative Institution until the age of 60 years and entitled to all consequential benefits. Writ petitions are %FC°"Uv"§'l4-ave perused th_e...»o.r_derj'dat'ed'.fV1V8';1'_}2O2V_Qf'i passed in W.P.No.19219/2009.1} B:y'~'lVth'is_ "order,:"i'i'«.i,y"h.iile allowing the petition, direction the-"

respondents to extend serx/Vice-».t)'e'n_yefits.'to.:Vth¢_V5Detitioner until he attains the agéefofi ._as a consequence thereof, relieving orderwwlais the petitions filed by the terms of the order dated vappellant--Society was obligedlllyvto the respondents, they challevlngyed insofar as it orders payment of bac!<wages" the resporidents for the period between the aj-ofrelivilnig" """ "and date of reinstatement of the . 'respondents...' *1::t appears, the following question was referred to theul-';ulvl Bench in W.P.No.13655/2009:
"Whether an employee of the Co--operative sector, relieved of his duties after attaining the age of 58 years is entitled to payment of salary till the date of reinstatement pursuant to the interim order of this passed in writ petition i.e., during the_;'perioVd: for which he has not worked?"

The Full Bench, while answered it in terms of Vpag:rag>raphs:11-.VAa"ndVA"~;VVi'2"'of the» judgment dated --§5_arégcraph and 12 read thus:

'How:ever,f;hay'i'ng.._noticed that in an issue relating» tof'--.ccV;Iues--tion of grant of in circumstance where the iipenefit order was extended tout'the"employ.ees'"n'of Co--operative societies to xth'e-------age of superannuation from 58 to 3 yea/'st and since the employees concerned haye__e:}<ercised their right differently, we are of opinion that the employees can be bifurcated into three categories. Firstly, the employees who agitated against the order relieving then at the age of 58 years, by filing petitions before this Court without loss of irrespective of the fact whether 'V' benefit of interim orders ornot. Se'coi7d'ly,.'V"thVe.V persons who had approac.{7ed:' belatedly (say after three months) thouglr they had knowledge of thQ.,s:':vGT'oyernn7--enin thirdly, the persons wh'oui';o.t approach: this Court at all, but,' :wierfe_e;{tended the benefit . the management them'sel.ves---due-tog'the"-"declaration of the legal llvposition.

i' 4' of the first of the above . , noticedvicategoryyiiiwe are of the view that they beiievntitled to full backwages. In second or noticed category, they would not v_be'uenitit/ed to backwages for the period from u the date they were relieved from service at the age of 58 years till the date on which they filed the writ petition even if no interim orders were granted in their favour. In respect of the third \§< 7 category, they will not be entitled to backwages. for the period they had not worked. the above principle, the petitioner 3 case will fall in the second would be entitled to sag/ar.,v only. 20.05.2009 onwards, b"u:t1'livou/d"beentitled to continuity of seiyice 'o_th.e'r_ conseiqt/Vential benefits.

The},-' Re.fei€'ei'ice'"' 'sands answered _ - for the parties fairly state that the case"V-ofltheV'res'p,onde-nts is covered by the Judgment of Ful§{"Bench and they fall in the second category carved of the said judgment . Therefore, they disposal of these appeals in terms of the jud'gm'ent'o;f the Full Bench.

6. In view thereof, these appeals stand disposed for in terms of the judgment of the Full Bench dated 14.2.2011 and as a consequence thereof in 8 W.A.No.871/2010 & W.A.Nos.2776-77/10, we .d'ivrLe_'Ct"'«the appellant-Society to pay backwages to from the date of filing of the wr_i_t....petiticnV"i;'e';;';V till they are reinstated.

7. In so far as W.A';r'i\ijo,372/1"1_V_iseonterned, we direct the appellantp»»ay_bac|-fiikikaoes to the respondents from the date vitheflvrit petition i.e., 6.7.2009 ti||;h'e««;i_s_"reiriistated. l 'V The make payment of backiwag-es order within a period of three months 'frort'nvto'da"y;Vp' = ' Sc1/-

JUDGE Sd/-

JUDGE