Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Sri. T. N. Jayadevappa vs Karnataka State Finance Corporation on 5 May, 2015
Bench: M.Y. Eqbal, Amitava Roy
ITEM NO.63 COURT NO.9 SECTION XV
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 4205/2015
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 12/08/2013
in WA No. 3252/2010 passed by the High Court Of Karnataka At
Bangalore)
SRI. T. N. JAYADEVAPPA Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
KARNATAKA STATE FINANCE CORPORATION & ANR. Respondent(s)
(with prayer for interim relief and office report)
Date : 05/05/2015 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.Y. EQBAL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMITAVA ROY
For Petitioner(s)
Mrs. Revathy Raghavan,Adv.
Mr. S. Muthu Krishnan, Adv.
For Respondent(s)
Ms. Kiran Suri, Sr.Adv.
Mr. S.J. Amith, Adv.
Dr. (Mrs.) Vipin Gupta,Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Leave granted.
The appeal is disposed of in terms of the signed order.
[INDU POKHRIYAL] [SUKHBIR PAUL KAUR] COURT MASTER A.R.-CUM-P.S. Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by (Signed order is placed on the file) Sukhbir Paul Kaur Date: 2015.05.07 11:38:38 IST Reason: IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.4229 OF 2015 (Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No.4205 of 2015) SRI T.N. JAYADEVAPPA APPELLANT Versus KARNATAKA STATE FINANCE CORPORATION RESPONDENT(S) AND ANOTHER O R D E R We have heard learned counsel for the parties. Leave granted.
This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment and order dated 12.8.2013 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore in Writ Appeal No. 3252 of 2010 (L-TER) whereby the High Court modified the order passed by the learned Single Judge and the Labour Court and directed the respondents to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) in lieu of reinstatement as well as back wages as awarded by the Labour Court, Mangalore to the workman within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.
The appellant was appointed as a Watchman in the year 1994. His services were terminated in the year 1998 without following the provision contained in Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. -2- The appellant approached the Labour Court who had given Award of reinstatement. The respondent being aggrieved by the Award of the Labour Court, approached the High Court by filing a Writ Petition which was allowed by setting aside the Award of the Labour Court and remanded the matter back to the Labour Court for fresh disposal in accordance with law. The Labour Court passed an Award directing the respondent Management to reinstate the appellant to his post with continuity of service for other purposes and also ordered that the appellant is entitled for 50% of back wages from the date of his reinstatement with other consequential benefits.
Aggrieved by the Award passed by the Labour Court, Mangalore, the respondent filed Writ Petition before the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore, which was rejected by the learned Single Judge.
Aggrieved by the Award of the Labour Court, Mangalore and order of the learned Single Judge, the respondents preferred the Writ Appeal before the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore.
In appeal, filed by the respondents, it was held that instead of reinstatement as well as backwages, the appellant should get compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only). -3-
After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that the appellant should, at least, get compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lacs only).
Hence, this appeal is disposed of with a direction to the respondent to pay a further sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) as compensation. It would be appropriate if the amount is tendered or paid to the appellant by way of cheque or bank draft. The cheque or bank draft shall be deposited with the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee by the first week of July, 2015, wherefrom the appellant may collect the same, after due verification and identification by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant.
........................J. (M.Y. EQBAL) .........................J. (AMITAVA ROY) New Delhi, May 05, 2015