IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU ON THE 25TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. G. PANDIT W.A.Nos.3703 OF 2016 AND 3706 OF 2016 (L-PG) BETWEEN:
1. THE ASST. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER CAUVERY NEERAVARI NIGAM LIMITED NO.10, H.L.B.C. SUB-DIVISION KIKKERI, K.R. PET TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT-577451.
2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR CAUVERY NEERAVARI NIGAM LIMITED CAUVERY BHAVAN COMPLEX GOKULAM 4TH STAGE MYSORE-570 001 NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER FINANCE.
... APPELLANTS (BY SRI. K S BHEEMAIAH, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE DEPUTY LABOUR COMMISSIONER AND APPELLATE AUTHORITY BENGALURU-560 029.
2. THE ASSISTANT LABOUR COMMISSIONER AND CONTROLLING AUTHORITY UNDER PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT MYSORE DIVISION MYSORE-570 001.
3. SRI B V SATYANARAYANA MAJOR SON OF LATE B N VENKATTASUBBAIAH NUGU BEERALALLA H.L.B.C.QUARTERS KIKKERI, K.R PET TALUK MYSORE DISTRICT MANDYA DISTRICT-577 451.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.LAXMINARAYANA, AGA FOR RESPONDENT Nos.1 AND 2 SRI. K GOVINDARAJ, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT No.3) THESE APPEALS ARE FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED IN THE WRIT PETITION Nos.33235/16 AND 33236/2016 DATED 20/06/2016.
THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, RAVI MALIMATH J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT There is a delay of 13 days in filing the appeals.
However, we have heard the learned counsel on merit.
2. There was delay of beyond 120 days in filing the appeal before the Appellate Authority. Therefore, the Appellate Authority dismissed the appeal. Questioning the same, the instant Writ Petition Nos.33235 of 2016 and 33236 of 2016 were filed. The learned Single Judge came to the view, that the Appellate Authority has no authority to condone the delay beyond 120 days. The same is being disputed by the appellants. However, the learned counsel contends that he has a good case on merits.
3. On hearing learned counsels, we do not find any merit in these appeals. The appellate authority could not have condoned the delay beyond 120 days. It is a statutory bar. Therefore, the merits of the appeal become inconsequential. Under these circumstances, we do not find any good ground to interfere with the impugned order dated 20.06.2016 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition Nos.33235 of 2016 and 33236 of 2016. Consequently the appeals being devoid of merit are dismissed on merit and on delay.
Sd/- Sd/-
JUDGE JUDGE NG* CT:bms