IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT WRIT PETITION NO.50817 OF 2019 (L - RES) BETWEEN:
1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR BESCOM, CORPORATE OFFICE, K.R.CIRCLE, BANGALORE – 560 001.
2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, BESCOM NO.7, SUB DIVISION, NORTH DIVISION, BANGALORE – 560 001.
PETITIONERS ARE REPRESENTED BY THE GENERAL MANAGER (ADMIN & HR) CORPORATE OFFICE, BESCOM, KR CIRCLE, BANGALORE – 560 001.
... PETITIONERS (BY SRI SANJEEV B L, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. SRI. A. NAGESH S/O LATE ANJINAPPA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, NO.39, VEERASAGAR, ATTUR POST, YELAHANKA HOBLI, BANGALORE – 560 001.
2. ADDITIONAL LABOUR COMMISSIONER, (INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS), OFFICE OF THE LABOUR COMMISSIONER, KARMIKA BHAVANA, BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 029. ... RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE AWARD DATED 02.02.2017 PASSED BY PRINCIPAL LABOUR COURT, BENGALURU IN REF. NO.24/2010 VIDE ANNEXURE – B AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Petitioners are invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court for assailing the judgment and award dated 02.02.2017, a copy whereof is at Annexure-B, the operative portion of which reads as under:
“The Reference under Section 10(1)(C) of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 is ALLOWED IN PART.
BESCOM authorities are hereby directed to act in accordance with the settlement and board of resolution, if the name of the first party is appearing in the list of settlement.”
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that since the respondent-workman has not worked continuously for a period of six years, which is a pre-condition to avail the benefit of Settlement dated 03.06.2004, a copy whereof is at Annexure-C, the respondent – workman cannot be permitted to draw the benefit, which is ordered to be granted conditionally.
3. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and having perused the petition papers, this Court declines to grant indulgence in the matter inasmuch as, the benefit conferred by the subject award is conditional in the sense, the respondent-workman would reap the benefit thereof only if he complies with the terms and conditions of the Settlement; if he does not comply with the requirement, then he is not entitled to take benefit of the award.
In the above circumstances, writ petition being devoid of merits is disposed off with the observations made hereinabove.
This order will not come in the way of petitioners considering the case of the respondent-workman in terms of the award keeping in view the terms of the settlement in question.
Sd/- JUDGE MDS/-