Karnataka High Court
Central Warehousing Corporation ... vs Central Warehousing Corporation on 29 January, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:3739
WP No. 20002 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
WRIT PETITION NO. 20002 OF 2023 (S-TR)
BETWEEN:
1. CENTRAL WAREHOUSING CORPORATION
EMPLOYEES UNION (BENGALURU REGION),
REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY,
B. RAGHAVENDRA RAO,
S/O BHEEMA BHATTA,
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,
CWC EMPLOYEES UNION,
NO. LF-10, NANDINI LAYOUT,
BENGALURU - 560 091.
2. G. SUNNY SIDDHARTH,
S/O G.S. SUDHAKAR,
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
Digitally signed H.NO.268, HABITAT CREST,
by V KRISHNA
Location: HIGH
HOODI, WHITEFIELD,
COURT OF BENGALURU - 560 066.
KARNATAKA
3. P. SENTHIL,
S/O A. PARAMASIVAN,
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS,
NO.16, SHELYN MANSION,
9TH CROSS, CHINNAPPANAHALLI,
DODDANAKUNDI EXTENSION,
BENGALURU - 560 037.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:3739
WP No. 20002 of 2023
4. AISHWARYA. S,
D/O SRINIVASA H.S,
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,
NO. 303, SVA ANANDA NILAYA,
IMMADIHALLI, WHITEFIELD,
BENGALURU - 560 066.
5. HARISH REDDY. C,
S/O Y.R. CHANGA REDDY,
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
VENKATESHWARA NILAYA, 4TH CROSS,
THIRUMALA BAKERY ROAD, CHANNASANDRA,
KADUGODI, BENGALURU - 560 067.
6. T. NAVEEN,
S/O L. THIPPAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
MANJUNATH BUILDING,
OPP: ANEKETHANA SCHOOL,
SIRA GATE, TUMKUR - 571 137.
7. POOJA S. JALAGAR,
D/O SHIVANANDA JALAGAR,
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,
KERUR POST, BAGALKOT,
BADAMI DISTRICT - 587 101.
8. CHANDAN J.M,
S/O NIRANJANASWAMY.S,
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,
134, ANANTHADHAMA,
1ST CROSS, CENTRAL EXCISE LAYOUT,
VIJAYANAGARA, BENGALURU - 560 040.
9. NANDINI A.R,
D/O MURALI D,
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:3739
WP No. 20002 of 2023
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
NO.25, 1ST FLOOR, 4TH CROSS,
V.R.LAYOUT, MATHIKERE,
BENGALURU - 560 054.
10. GEETHA S. J,
D/O JAGADEESH S.R,
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,
NO.41, 4TH CROSS ROAD,
J.C. NAGAR, JAI MARUTHI NAGAR,
NANDINI LAYOUT, BENGALURU - 560 096.
11. AKHILA A. KULAKARNI,
D/O ANAND KULAKARNI,
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
NO.6, 2ND FLOOR, 13TH BLOCK,
SRI. RAM SAMIKSHA RESIDENTIAL COMPLEX,
JALAHALLI EAST, BENGALURU - 560 015.
12. DIVYA S,
D/O SATHYANARAYAN.T,
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
H.NO.52, 3RD CROSS, NEAR GANESHA TEMPLE,
HENNUR CROSS, NARAYANAPPA ROAD,
KALYANA NAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 043.
13. CHANDRASHEKAR K.C,
S/O CHIKKA KARIYAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
NO.118, 2ND MAIN, 3RD CROSS,
KAMALANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 079.
14. RATHAN BABU,
S/O N. RATNAM,
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
H.NO.19-4-582, SWAMI VIVEKANANDA COLONY,
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC:3739
WP No. 20002 of 2023
HUMANABAD ROAD, NAUBAD,
BIDAR - 585 402.
15. MANJAPPA.H,
S/O HANUMANTHAPPA.L,
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
R/AT NEELAVVA VERUPAKSHAPPA UDAPUDI,
BAZAR ROAD, SOUNDATTI,
BELAGAVI - 591 126.
16. C. RAGHU,
S/O CHIKKANNA,
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,
C/O LF.10, NANDINI LAYOUT,
BENGALURU - 560 096.
17. KETHAVATH VIKAS,
S/O RANGARAO KETHAVATH,
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,
C/O HOUSE NO. 2095, HOSPETE ONI,
SOUNDATTI, BELAGAVI - 591 126.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. G.K. BHAT, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR
SMT. SUDHA D, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. CENTRAL WAREHOUSING CORPORATION,
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA UNDERTAKING,
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER,
REGIONAL OFFICE, LF-10,
NANDINI LAYOUT, BENGALURU - 560 096.
2. THE GROUP GENERAL MANAGER (PERSONNEL),
CENTRAL WAREHOUSING CORPORATION,
CORPORATE OFFICE, NEW DELHI - 110 016.
-5-
NC: 2024:KHC:3739
WP No. 20002 of 2023
3. THE DIRECTOR (PERSONNEL),
CENTRAL WAREHOUSING CORPORATION,
4/1, WAREHOUSING BHAWAN,
AUGUST KRANTI MARG, HAUZ KHAS,
NEW DELHI - 110 016.
4. THE DEPUTY CHIEF LABOUR COMMISSIONER,
(CENTRAL AND CONCILIATION OFFICER),
MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT,
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, GURUGUNTE PALYA,
YASHWANTHAPURA, BENGALURU - 560 022.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI B.S. KARTHIKEYAN, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R4)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A) QUASHING THE
IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 07/07/2023 IN NO. E-105/(02)/P
AND T/RO/2023-24 AS PER ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The captioned petition is filed by the trade union as well as by the aggrieved employees, assailing the impugned transfer notification order passed by respondent No.1-Regional Manager. While hearing the captioned petition, it is brought to the notice of this Court that a dispute was raised before the conciliation officer and that -6- NC: 2024:KHC:3739 WP No. 20002 of 2023 the conciliation officer has granted an interim order of status quo.
2. Learned counsel for the respondents has now placed on record the memorandum of settlement arrived between the petitioner/trade union and the respondents/corporation. Placing reliance on the memorandum of settlement, he would point out that in terms of settlement, the impugned transfer order is withdrawn and therefore, the captioned petition does not survive for consideration.
3. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner would however contend that the petition does not become infructuous on account of memorandum of settlement. He would vehemently argue and contend that the memorandum of settlement arrived between the trade union and corporation is in contravention of transfer guidelines.
-7-
NC: 2024:KHC:3739 WP No. 20002 of 2023
4. Be that as it may. If the petitioners, through trade union, raised a dispute before the conciliation officer and a settlement is reached between the trade union and management, the petitioners individually cannot be permitted to proceed with this writ petition on the ground that the memorandum of settlement is in contravention of transfer guidelines.
5. If a dispute is raised by the petitioners through a trade union and the same has ended in a settlement, the captioned petition does not survive for consideration. In terms of settlement, the respondents-management has partially withdrawn the impugned transfer order dated 07.07.2023. The fresh transfers are affected in terms of settlement and these transfers are only confined within the Bangalore complex, subject to adherence to the station seniority of employees, while transfers beyond Bangalore city are kept in abeyance for the time being to be resolved later on as per policy.
-8-
NC: 2024:KHC:3739 WP No. 20002 of 2023
6. It would be useful for this Court to cull out the relevant portion of terms of settlement which reads as under:
"1. It was agreed by both the parties that the transfer order dated 7.7.2023 shall be enforceable partially viz the Regional Manager may implement local transfers within Bangalore Complex subject to the adherence to the station seniority of the employee.
2. It was agreed that the transfer ordered other than Bangalore shall be kept in abeyance for the time being, which may be examined as per the policy in vogue.
3. It is agreed that the protected workmen declared by the union will not be transferred/relieved till a decision is taken by the Appropriate Authority. Both parties have agreed to sign this settlement before the conciliation Officer & Dy.Chief Labour Commissioner (Central), Bangalore on this the 22nd day of November, 2023."
7. On enquiry, learned Senior counsel on a query as to whether seven of the petitioners who are before this Court who are subjected to transfer would fall under clause (1) or clause (2), it is stated across the bar that seven petitioners who are now subsequently transferred would fall under clause (1) of the settlement. In the light of memorandum of settlement, the petitioners, contrary to the terms of settlement, cannot raise fresh grounds in the -9- NC: 2024:KHC:3739 WP No. 20002 of 2023 captioned petition. Such a recourse is not permissible. If, pursuant to terms of settlement, some of the petitioners are transferred in terms of settlement, it is open for them to question the transfer orders. The impugned transfer order dated 07.07.2023, is withdrawn. The captioned petition has been rendered infructuous and therefore, this Court is not inclined to entertain the captioned petition. Hence, I pass the following:
ORDER The writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE HDK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1 CT: BHK