IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF MARCH, 2019 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. L. NARAYANA SWAMY, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR WRIT APPEAL NOS.871-875/2019(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, BANNERGHATTA 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 ... APPELLANTS (BY SRI.H.R.NARAYANA RAO, ADV. FOR SRI.RAJESWARA P N, ADV.) 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 APPEALS ARE FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 07/03/2019 IN WP NOS.10177-181/2019 [S-RES] PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE.
THESE WRIT APPEALS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, P.S.DINESH KUMAR J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R The appellants are aggrieved by the Official Memorandum dated 10.01.2019. The second respondent – The Director and Dean of Bowring and Lady Curzon Medical College and Research Institute did not renew the contract of the petitioners who were working as Laboratory Technologists. The Hon’ble learned Single Judge has relegated the parties to seek appropriate remedy under the Industrial Disputes Act.
2. Sri H.S.Narayana Rao, learned counsel for the appellants submits that since the respondent is State, the writ petition is not maintainable.
3. Perusal of the official memorandum shows that the contract has not been renewed on the premise that there was mis-appropriation of funds. These factual aspects require evidence. In the circumstances, in our view, there is no legal infirmity in the order passed by the learned Single Judge.
2. The learned counsel for the appellants seeks liberty to move the labour Court with application for interim relief. Accordingly, these appeals are disposed of with liberty to the appellants to move the Labour Court with necessary application seeking interim relief.
No costs.
Sd/-
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- JUDGE nm