Karnataka High Court
Panchayat Development Officer vs Deputy Labour Commissioner on 15 February, 2023
-1-
WP No. 103051 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
WRIT PETITION NO. 103051 OF 2022 (L-RES)
BETWEEN:
PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER
GRAM PANCHAYT TIMPPAPUR
(BASAVANAGAR L.T.)
TQ AND DIST. BAGLAKOT
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. BHUSHAN B KULKARNI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. DEPUTY LABOUR COMMISSIONER
BELAGAVI REGION
BELAGAI PIN-590 001
Digitally signed by
CHANDRASHEKAR 2. LABOUR INSPECTOR
LAXMAN
KATTIMANI
CHANDRASHEKAR
LAXMAN Location: HIGH
COURT OF
BAGALKOT CIRCLE, BAGALKOT
KATTIMANI
KARNATAKA
DHARWAD
Date: 2023.02.20
DIST. BAGALKOT
16:21:44 +0530
PIN. 587101
3. SRI. SHANTAPPA S/O SHIVALINGAPPA WODEYAR
AGE. 50 YEARS,
OCC. NOT KNOWN,
R/O. RAMPUR,
TQ. BAGALKOT
DIST. BAGALKOT
PIN-587207
-2-
WP No. 103051 of 2022
4. SRI. BHARAMAPPA S/O HANAMAPPA HANCHINAL
AGE. 50 YEARS,
OCC. NOT KNOWN,
R/O. RAMPUR,
TQ. BAGALKOT
DIST. BAGALKOT
PIN-587207
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SHIVAPRABHU S.HIREMATH, AGA FOR R1 AND R2
SRI RAVI HEGDE, ADVOCATE FOR R3
R4 SERVED)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO 1. ISSUE A
WRIT IN NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED
ORDER PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 BEARING
NO.OKAABE/VE/PAKA/CR-34/2019/2064 DATED 30.06.2022,
AT VIDE ANNEXURE-G.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
'G' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. Sri Ravi Hegde, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.3, raised preliminary objection relating to entertaining the writ petition in view of alternative remedy -3- WP No. 103051 of 2022 provided under Section 17 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936. He further contended that the petitioner in order to avoid the statutory deposit, under Section 17(1)(A) of the said Act, has filed this writ petition as well as not complied with order dated 26.09.2022 passed by this Court. Accordingly, he sought for dismissal of the writ petition.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the order dated 26.09.2022 has not been complied with. In that view of the matter, as alternative remedy is available to petitioner to challenge the impugned order dated 30.06.2022, (Annexure-G) before the competent authority under Section 17 of the Act, along with pre-deposit as per Section 17(1)(A) of the said Act, I am of the opinion that, the petition cannot be accepted as the efficacious remedy is available to the petitioner under the said Act. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.
All the contention of the parties are kept open.
Sd/-
JUDGE SB:List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31