BANGALORE METROPOLITAN TRANSPORT CORPORTAION vs. THE DEPUTY LABOUR COMMISSIONER

PDF · subscribers
WP/44559/2012HC KarnatakaKAHC01007784201205 September 2013Bench: RAM MOHAN REDDY3 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court modified the orders of the Controlling and Appellate Authorities based on the out-of-court settlement. The Corporation agreed to pay a reduced gratuity amount with interest, and the workman would receive this amount.

What were the facts?

The Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation challenged orders from the Labour Commissioner and Appellate Authority regarding gratuity payment. The dispute was settled out of court between the Corporation and the workman.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the quantum of gratuity payable to the workman. The case was resolved through a compromise between the parties.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Payment of Gratuity Act

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

W.P. 44559/12 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2013

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM MOHAN REDDY

WRIT PETITION NO. 44559 OF 2012 (L-KSRTC)

BETWEEN

BANGALORE METROPOLITAN TRANSPORT CORPORATION CENTRAL OFFICE K H ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR BANGALORE BY ITS CHIEF TRAFFIC MANAGER REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER ... PETITIONER

(By Smt : H R RENUKA, ADVOCATE)

AND

1.

THE DEPUTY LABOUR COMMISSIONER AND THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY UNDER THE PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT REGION 1, KARMEEKABHAVANA BANNERGHATTA ROAD BANGALORE

2.

THE ASSISTANT LABOUR COMMISSIONER AND CONTROLLING AUTHORITY UNDER THE PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT BANGALORE DIVISION-2 KARMEEKABHAVANA BANNERGHATTA ROAD BANGALORE

W.P. 44559/12 2 3. HASSAN BAIG S/O LATE MEHABOOB BAIG ADULT R/O VENKATAPPA STREET NEW MASJID ROAD NEAR AL AMEEN COLLEGE MAGADI TOWN RAMNAGAR DISTRICT ... RESPONDENTS

(By Sri.H VENKATESH DODDERI, AGA FOR R1 R2 – SERVED S B MUKKANNAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR R3 )

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 23.7.09 VIDE ANNX-C AND DATED 13.8.12 PASSED BY R2 VIDE ANNX-E PASSED BY R1 AND GRANT AN INTERIM ORDER TO STAY THE OPERATION AND EXECUTION OF THE ORDER DATED 23.7.09 VIDE ANNX-C AND DATED 13.8.12 PASSED BY R2 VIDE ANNX-E; AND ETC

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRL.HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

Learned counsel for the parties submit that the lis brought before court is settled out of court in the following terms: a) that the Corporation would pay Rs.26,622/- in place of Rs.55,722/- ordered by the Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act;

b) that the sum would carry interest at 10% p.a. from 8.8.2008 upto the date of deposit;

W.P. 44559/12 3

c) that the petitioner-corporation would be entitled to seek refund of Rs.2,393/- paid to the Income-tax Department;

d) that the Controlling Authority shall forthwith release Rs.26,622/- with 10% interest to the respondent-workman; and

e) the balance of the amount in deposit to be refunded to the petitioner.

In the result, this petition is ordered accordingly. The orders of the Controlling Authority and the Appellate Authority are modified in the above terms.

Sd/- JUDGE

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →