Karnataka High Court
The Chief Executive Officer, vs Prakash on 11 July, 2017
Bench: A.S.Bopanna, H.B.Prabhakara Sastry
:1:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JULY, 2017
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.S.BOPANNA
AND
THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE H.B. PRABHAKARA SASTRY
WRIT APPEAL NO.101506/2016 (L-TER)
BETWEEN:
1. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
TALUKA PANCHAYAT, HIREKERUR,
DISTRICT: HAVERI.
2. THE SECRETARY,
PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER,
GRAM PANCHAYAT, YETTINAHALLI,
HIREKERUR, DISTRICT: HAVERI. ...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI.MALLIKARJUNSWAMY B HIREMATH, ADV.)
AND:
1. PRAKASH S/O FAKKIRAPPA MADIWALAR,
AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
R/O YETTINAHALLI, TQ: HIREKERUR,
DISTRICT: HAVERI.
2. THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF ZILLA PANCHAYAT RAJ,
GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA,
M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU-1.
:2:
3. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
ZILLA PANCHAYAT, HAVERI. ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.RAVI HOSAMANI, AGA, FOR R2)
THIS APPEAL IS FILED U/S. 4 OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE LEARNED SINGLE
JUDGE'S ORDER DATED 28.07.2016 PASSED IN
W.P.NO.67147/2010 (L-TER) IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
THIS DAY, A.S.BOPANNA J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Learned Government Advocate to accept notice for respondent No.2 and file memo of appearance in four weeks. Considering the nature of disposal, notice to respondents No.1 and 3 is not necessary.
2. The appellants are before this Court assailing the order dated 28.07.2016 passed in W.P.No.67147/2010. The learned Single Judge while disposing of the writ petition has upheld the award dated 09.07.2009 passed in Reference No.6/2004 to the extent of ordering compensation in lieu of reinstatement, but has enhanced the compensation from Rs.25,000/- to Rs.1,00,000/-.
:3:
3. The learned counsel for the appellants while assailing the conclusion reached by the Labour Court as also the order passed by the learned Single Judge, would refer to the document at Annexure-F, which was marked as Ex.W2 before the Labour Court. The contention put forth is that the Secretary of the Gram Panchayat had not signed the document as evident therein and a document signed by any other person for and on his behalf cannot create any right. Though such a contention is put forth, a perusal of the award passed by the Labour Court dated 09.07.2009 in Reference No.6/2004 as at Annexure-G would indicate that the Labour Court has taken into consideration the entire conspectus of the matter including the said document and in that light, having appreciated the same has passed the award. In such circumstance, in a proceedings of the present nature, where the re- appreciation of the evidence is not permitted, the consideration in that regard, more particularly, in a :4: circumstance where no other contrary document is placed by the appellants, would not be possible.
4. Be that as it may, the learned Single Judge in any event has upheld the award insofar as declining reinstatement of the respondent No.1 herein. Therefore, the only question that arises is, in such circumstance, whether the learned Single Judge was justified in enhancing the compensation to the said extent. It is seen that the learned Single Judge has also taken into consideration the length of service that the respondent No.1 would have been left with, if in fact he had been reinstated and in that view ordered the appropriate amount.
5. In that view, when we see that the respondent No.1 was aged about 34 years when the writ petition was filed before the learned Single Judge and would have been left with long service, if he had been reinstated, an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- as ordered to be paid in lieu of :5: reinstatement, when the finding of the Labour Court was with regard to the respondent No.1 having completed more than 240 days, in any event would not call for interference.
6. Hence, the instant appeal being devoid of merit stands disposed of.
7. In view of our conclusion above, the application seeking condonation of delay also does not merit consideration. I.A.No.2/2016 is disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE Sd/-
JUDGE Sh