IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R DEVDAS PETITION NO.25985 OF 2017 (L-RES) BETWEEN SRI N B SAGADEVA EX-EMPLOYEE OF M/S ADOR MULTIPRODUCTS LIMITED SINCE DECEASED REPRESENTED BY LRS i. SMT. R.SUGUMARI AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS W/O LATE N B SAGADEVAN ii. SRI S SAVITH AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS S/O LATE N B SAGADEVAN iii. SRI S SANJITH AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS S/O LATE N B SAGADEVAN ALL ARE R/AT NO.343/3 C/O M/S.ESWAR MEDICALS AND GENERAL STORES ANDHRAHALLI MAIN ROAD MARITHINAGARA, 2ND STAGE VISHWANEEDAM POST BENGALURU-560 091 (BY SRI NAIK V S, ADVOCATE) ... PETITIONERS AND 1. THE DY. COMMISSIONER BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT REVENUE BHAVAN BENGALURU-560 001 2. THE DY.LABOUR COMMISSIONER REGION-1 KARMIKA BHAVANA BANNERGHATTA ROAD BENGALURU-560 029 (BY SRI S.V.GIRI KUMAR, AGA) ... RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS FROM THE RESPONDENTS PERTAINING TO ANNEXURE-A, DIRECT THE R-1 TO RECOVER THE AMOUNT DUE FROM THE EMPLOYER AS PER THE RECOVERY CERTIFICATE/ ORDER ISSUED BY THE R-2 DTD.23.12.2016 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER R.DEVDAS J., (ORAL):
One Sri N.B.Sagadeva, who was working with M/s.Ador Multiproducts Limited, was terminated from service with effect from 03.04.2008. The workman raised a dispute in I.D.No.12/2008 and the said dispute was allowed. The Labour Court directed reinstatement along with backwages, in terms of the award dated 04.06.2013. Thereafter, the said workman passed away on 03.01.2014 leaving behind his wife and two children as legal heirs.
2. The legal representatives of the deceased workman filed an application under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the I.D. Act’ for short) before the Labour Court in Application No.7/2014 for computation of monetary benefits payable to the legal representatives of the deceased workman. The said application was allowed by order dated 19.11.2014 and the Management was directed to pay a sum of Rs.2,63,127/- along with interest at the rate of 18% p.a. from the date of award till the date of actual payment.
3. Thereafter, the legal representatives of the deceased workman submitted a representation to the Management on 08.06.2015 and requested compliance of the award and further orders issued by the Labour Court. When the Management failed to comply with the directions issued by the Labour Court and the requisition made by the legal representatives of the workman, the legal representatives were forced to file another application under Section 33C(1) of the I.D.Act for issuance of recovery certificate.
4. The Deputy Labour Commissioner, Bengaluru, who is the authority under the Act, having afforded an opportunity of hearing to the employer, issued recovery certificate vide order dated 23.12.2016. The recovery certificate was forwarded to the Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore Urban District, to execute the recovery certificate as arrears of land revenue.
5. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that inspite of several representations, the first respondent-Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore Urban District, Bengaluru, failed to initiate action and recover the said sum, in terms of the recovery certificate issued by the competent authority.
6. The learned Additional Government Advocate submits that the first respondent was duty bound to initiate action and recover the amount as directed by the competent authority.
7. In view of the above, the first respondent-Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore Urban District, Bengaluru, is hereby directed to implement the order of recovery issued by the second respondent herein vide recovery certificate dated 23.12.2016, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
8. Accordingly, the petition stands allowed.
No order as to costs.
JT/-
SD/- JUDGE