Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

K S Sham Kumar vs The Assistant Labour Commissioner And Controlling Authority

High Court Of Karnataka|12 December, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT WRIT PETITION NO.46548 OF 2018 (L-PG) BETWEEN:
K. S. SHAM KUMAR SON OF K. S. SHIVARAM, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.2778, 2ND STAGE, 13TH MAIN, RAJAJINAGAR, "E" BLOCK, BENGALURU - 560 010.
(BY SRI. S.R.RAVIPRAKASH, ADVOCATE) ... PETITIONER AND:
1 . THE ASSISTANT LABOUR COMMISSIONER AND CONTROLLING AUTHORITY UNDER THE PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT, DIVISION NO.4, KARMIKA BHAVANA, BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BENGALURU-560 029.
2 . THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER URBAN DISTRICT, REVENUE BUILDING, BEHIND KANDAYA BHAVANA, KEMPEGOWDA ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 009.
3 . ADVANCED MICRONIC DEVICE LTD., AN OPTO CIRCUITS GROUP COMPANY, ADVANCED MICRONIC DEVICE LTD., AN OPTO CIRCUITS GROUP COMPANY, A 305, 1ST BLOCK, 2ND FLOOR, ABOVE ELECTRONICS CITY POST OFFICE, ELECTRONIC CITY PHASE-1, BENGALURU - 560 100, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, MR. DHEERENDRA KUMAR SINGH.
4 . MR. DHEERENDRA KUMAR SINGH THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, ADVANCED MICRONIC DEVICE LTD., AN OPTO CIRCUITS GROUP COMPANY, ADVANCED MICRONIC DEVICE LTD., AN OPTO CIRCUITS GROUP COMPANY, A 305, 1ST BLOCK, 2ND FLOOR, ABOVE ELECTRONICS CITY POST OFFICE, ELECTRONIC CITY PHASE-1, BENGALURU-560 100, 5 . MR. RAJKUMAR RAI SINGHAM DIRECTOR, 6 . MR. G. C. SOMADAS DIRECTOR, 7 . MR. ANU MULAY DIRECTOR, 8 . MR. SULEMAN MERCHANT DIRECTOR, RESPONDENT NOS.4 TO 8 ARE AT ADVANCED MICRONIC DEVICE LTD., AN OPTO CIRCUITS GROUP COMPANY, A 305, 1ST BLOCK, 2ND FLOOR, ABOVE ELECTRONICS CITY POST OFFICE, ELECTRONIC CITY PHASE-1, BENGALURU-560 100, ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. A.R.SHARADAMBA, AGA FOR R-1 & R-2; R-3 TO R-8 SERVED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT R-2 TO INITIATE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST R-3 TO 8 TO RECOVER THE GRATUITY AMOUNT OF RS.10,92,924/- (RUPEES TEN LAKHS NINETY TWO THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED AND TWENTY FOUR ONLY) WITH INTEREST AT 10% OF INTEREST PER ANNUM FROM THE DATE OF RESIGNATION I.E. 14.09.2014 TO 14.07.2018 RS.3,46,932/- FOR A PERIOD OF FOUR YEARS AND NINE MONTHS FROM 14.07.2018 TO 30.09.2018 FOR A PERIOD OF 78 DAYS AT 10% OF INTEREST PER ANNUM WOULD BE RS.15,608/- IN TOTAL RS.10,92,924/- (RUPEES TEN LAKH NINETY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE HUNDRED AN TWENTY FOUR ONLY) AS THE ARREARS OF LAND REVENUE INCLUDING WITH FURTHER INTEREST AT 10% PER ANNUM FROM THE DATE OF THIS WRIT PETITION TILL THE REALIZATION OF THE SAID AMOUTN; AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The short grievance of the petitioner is against non- consideration of his representations dated 30.07.2018 at Annexure-G & dated 07.09.2018 at Annexure-H which collectively call upon the respondents 1 & 2 to effect recovery in terms of the certificate for Recovery of Gratuity dated 11.09.2015 at Annexure-E in terms of the requisition evenly dated at Annexure-F issued by 1st respondent to the 2nd respondent in terms of the order dated 16.05.2015 for payment of gratuity of Rs.7,30,384/- with interest at the rate of 10% per annum.
2. Smt. A.R.Sharadamba, learned AGA having accepted notice for respondent Nos.1 & 2 submits that if a time line is prescribed by this Court and if the petitioner also cooperates by furnishing necessary information and documents, there would be no difficulty for considering the subject representation in accordance with law. The stand of the learned AGA is fair & reasonable.
In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed off directing respondent Nos.1 & 2 to meaningfully consider the aforesaid representation and to inform the petitioner the result thereof within a period of eight weeks.
It is open to the answering respondents to solicit any information/documents from the petitioner which are necessary for due consideration of the said representation; however, in the guise of such solicitation, delay shall not be brooked.
If the representation is not considered or also the result of consideration if any, is not intimated to the petitioner within the above prescribed period, the respondent Nos.1 & 2 shall pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- each personally to the petitioner for every week of delay till such consideration takes place.
Now, no costs.
Sd/- JUDGE DS
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

K S Sham Kumar vs The Assistant Labour Commissioner And Controlling Authority

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
12 December, 2019
Judges
  • Krishna S Dixit