IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION Nos.10177-181 OF 2019 (S–RES) BETWEEN 1. SRI. SUNDARESH M.S S/O. M.M. SWAMY, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS LABORATORY TECHNOLOGIST, R/AT 19/20, SRIKANTESHWARA LAYOUT, J.P. NAGAR 5TH PHASE, BENGALURU-560 078.
2. SRI. A.T. MOHAN KUMAR S/O. LATE THIRUMALA SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS LABORATORY TECHNOLOGIST, R/AT NO.26, II FLOOR, 9TH CROSS, MAGADI MAIN ROAD, AGRAHARA DASARAHALLI, BENGALURU-560 079.
3. SRI. B.K. SRIRAM S/O LATE KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS LABORATORY TECHNOLOGIST, R/AT NO.120/124, GOTTIGERE, BANERGHATTA MAIN ROAD, SHANKAR NAG ROAD, RAMAKRISHNAPPA LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560 083.
4. SMT. HEMAVATHI T.G W/O. V.T. JAGADISH AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS LABORATORY TECHNOLOGIST, R/AT NO.52, 2ND MAIN, 2ND CROSS, GYNANA BHARATHI LAYOUT, ULLAL MAIN ROAD, GOVERNMENT PRESS LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560 056.
5. SMT. R. REKHA W/O GIRISH J AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS LABORATORY TECHNOLOGIST, R/AT NO.29/B, 1ST MAIN, 1ST CROSS, RAGHAVA NAGAR, NEW TIMBER YARD LAYOUT, MYSURU ROAD, BENGALURU-560 026.
... PETITIONERS (BY SRI RAJESWARA P.N, ADVOCATE) AND 1. BENGALURU MEDICAL COLLEGE AND RESEARCH INSTITUTE, FORT ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001 REP: BY ITS DIRECTOR AND DEAN 2. BOWRING AND LADY CURZON MEDICAL COLLEGE & RESEARCH INSTITUTE, (AN AUTONOMOUS INSTITUTION OF GOVT.OF KARNATAKA) SHIVAJINAGARA, BENGALURU-560 001.
REP: BY ITS DIRECTOR AND DEAN ... RESPONDENTS THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE OFFICIAL MEMORANDUM DATED 10.01.2019 (ANNEXURE-A) ISSUED BY THE R-2 IN SO FAR AS PETITIONERS ARE CONCERNED AND ETC., THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R R.DEVDAS J., (ORAL):
The petitioners are before this Court seeking to quash the order of termination dated 10.01.2019 vide Annexure-A issued by the Director cum Dean of 2nd respondent – Bowring and Lady Curzon Medical College and Research Institute.
2. This Court is of the opinion that petitioners could not have invoke the extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India without availing the alternative efficacious remedy under the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 which is made available to get their grievance redressed in accordance with law.
3. Therefore, reserving liberty to the petitioners to invoke the provisions of Industrial Dispute Act, 1947, these petitions are dismissed.
SD/- JUDGE nms