IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 06TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 :PRESENT:
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE L.NARAYANA SWAMY AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE R.DEVDAS WRIT APPEAL NO.3323 OF 2018(S-R) BETWEEN 1. M/S. KARANTAKA POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LTD A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF COMPANIES ACT,. 1956, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT CAUVERY BHAVAN, BENGALURU-560009 NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, (ADMN. AND HR) SRI. H.N. GOPALA KRISHNA.
2. THE DIRECTOR (ADMN & HR) M/S KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LTD., CAUVERY BHAVAN, BENGALURU-560009 NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR (ADMN. AND HR) SRI. H N GOPALA KRISHNA.
... APPELLANTS AND (BY SRI K M NATARAJ, SENIOR COUNSEL A/W SRI RAGHAVENDRA SRIVATSA, ADVOCATE) 1. SRI THAGADAIAH S/O LATE THAGADEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, RETIRED SENIOR MECHANIC, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELEC), BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LIMITED, S-10 DIVISION, J P NAGAR, BANGALORE-560078 R/AT NO.58, WEAVERS COLONY, 11TH CROSS, GOTTIGERE BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BANGALORE-560076.
2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, M.S.BUILDINGS, DR.B.R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE-560001 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI K SUBBA RAO, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI N DEVARAJ N, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1 SRI BHANUPRAKASH V G, AGA FOR R2) THIS WRIT APPEAL FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 05/11/2018 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WP NO.34371/2014 [S-RES] AND DISMISS THE WRIT PETITIONS AND ETC.
THIS WRIT APPEAL COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, NARAYANA SWAMY J, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT On 5.11.2018, the writ petition was disposed of directing this appellants to consider the representation dated 20.08.2013 in terms of the judgment dated 18.11.2012 passed in W.A.Nos.15351-15352/2011 and extend the benefit of the Settlement dated 09.09.2011. Against which order, this appeal is filed.
2. Learned Senior Counsel for the appellants submits that the judgment referred to above is not applicable to the facts and circumstances of this case. The issue involved in this matter is altogether different. Hence, the direction issued to the appellants for consideration of representation in terms of the order in the writ appeal referred to above is not permissible. Hence, he seeks to set aside the order passed by the learned Single Judge. In support of his submission he placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Commr. Of Central Excise, Bangalore /vs./ Srikumar Agencies etc., reported in 2009 AIR SCW 942 and drew attention of this Court to paragraphs 4 and 5. In the same line, he placed reliance on the judgment in the case of Ashwani Kumar Singh /vs./ U.P.Public Service Commission and others reported in (2003) 11 SCC 584 to paragraph Nos.5 to 10. Learned counsel further submits that when the cases are disposed or allowed with a direction by referring a judgment passed in writ appeal on earlier occasion, there shall be scrutiny or examination as to applicability of the facts in disposed of matter. It is further submitted that the order passed in the writ appeal is not squarely applicable to the facts and circumstances of this case. Accordingly, the order passed by the learned Single Judge is to be set aside.
3. Learned Senior Counsel for the respondent on the other hand, submitted, as per the order passed by this Court, the appellants had agreed to pay pension to the respondents. When they have agreed to pay the benefits, filing of this appeal is contrary to law and hence it is submitted to dismiss the appeal.
4. It is found from the order that respondents have taken a specific ground in the writ petition that the pensionary benefits is on par with the order passed in W.A.Nos.15351-15352/2011. The respondents have not controverted the same by filing statement of objections and when there is a specific ground, it is bounden duty on the respondents to rebut the same by filing statement of objections, but no such statement has been filed. In that view of the matter, the learned Single Judge has disposed of the matter by directing the respondents to consider the representation of the appellant in terms of the order passed in W.A.Nos.15351-352/2011.
5. In the facts and circumstances, it is found that the appellants have not filed any statement of objections rebutting or controverting the ground taken by the petitioner. Hence, we deem it proper to remit the matter to the learned Single Judge with a direction to the appellants to file statement of objections if any, within a period of two weeks. The writ petition is restored to file. In case, statement of objections is not filed within a period of two weeks, then the order passed in the writ petition stands binding on the appellants with a direction to comply the order passed by the learned Single Judge. The parties are directed to appear before the learned Single Judge on 09.09.2019. We request the learned Single Judge to dispose of the matter as early as possible.
Writ appeal is accordingly disposed of.
SD/- JUDGE SD/- JUDGE KLY/