IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAGHVENDRA S. CHAUHAN WRIT PETITION No.927/2014 (S-DIS) BETWEEN :
SRI V. ARAVAMUDHAN S/O. LATE SRI N. V. IYENGAR, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, FORMER PROFESSOR AND H.O.D., R/O. NO.950, 21ST MAIN ROAD, BSK II STAGE, BANGALORE-560070. ... PETITIONER (BY SMT. VAISHALI HEGDE, ADV. FOR M/S. HEGDE AND RAO) AND:
1. J.S.S. ACADEMY OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION UTTARAHALLI, KENGERI ROAD, BANGALORE-560060, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL.
2. THE DIRECTOR (TECHNICAL) J.S.S. MAHAVIDYAPEETHA, MANASA GANGOTHRI CAMPUS, MYSORE.
3. THE EXECUTIVE SECRETARY J.S.S. MAHAVIDYAPEETHA, RAMANUJA ROAD, MYSORE.
4. VISVESVARAYA TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, SANTHIBASTAWAD ROAD, MACHHE, BELGAUM-590014.
5. THE ALL INDIA COUNCIL FOR TECHNICAL EDUCATION REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL OFFICER, AICTE – SOUTH WESTERN REGIONAL OFFICE, P. K. BLOCK, PALACE ROAD, BANGALORE-560009.
6. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION, VIKASA SOUDHA, DR. B. R. AMBEDKAR ROAD, BANGALORE-560001. ... RESPONDENTS (R-6 IMPLEADED AS PER COURT ORDER DATED 25.10.2017) (BY SRI SOMASHEKAR, ADV. FOR R-1 TO R-3; SMT. SANJANA REDDY, ADV. FOR R-4; SMT. SONA M BADIGER, ADV. FOR R-5;
SRI R. B. SATHYANARAYANA SINGH, AGA FOR R-6) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER OF TERMINATION DATED 1.10.2010 PASSED BY THE R-1 VIDE ANNEXURE-A & CONSEQUENTLY TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO RELEASE THE ARREARS OF SALARY DUE TO THE PETITIONER AS A RESULT OF THE ILLEGAL TERMINATION OF SERVICE 11 MONTHS BEFORE SUPERANNUATION AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING :
O R D E R Mr. V. Aravamudhan, the petitioner, and the Principal of J.S.S. Academy of Technical Education, the respondent No.1, are present before this Court. They have been identified by their respective counsel.
2. The learned counsel for parties submit that during the pendency of the present writ petition, the parties have entered into a settlement outside the Court. A copy of the settlement, entered between the parties, has been filed before this Court through a joint memo. The same shall be taken on record.
3. The terms of settlement are as under:-
1) The respondent No.1 has agreed to pay a sum of Rs.11,50,000/- (Rupees Eleven Lakhs Fifty Thousand only) to the petitioner in full and final settlement of all the claims of the petitioner including gratuity of Rs.4,50,000/- and ex-gratia of Rs.7,00,000/- and the payment will be made within one week from today by Account Payee Cheque in favour of the petitioner.
2) The petitioner has agreed to receive the amount indicated in clause (1) above in full and final settlement of all his claims against respondents 1, 2 and 3 including gratuity and ex-gratia.
3) It is agreed between the parties that all the claims of the petitioner against Respondent 1, 2 and 3 in respect of services rendered shall be deemed to have been settled by virtue of this joint memo including 11 months arrears of salary and Sixth Pay commission benefits as prayed for in the writ petition.
4) It is agreed by both the parties that the petitioner shall not be entitled to any other claim, monetary or otherwise, against Respondents 1,2 and 3 towards employment or non-employment.
5) It is further agreed by both the parties, that in view of this joint memo, the employer- employee relationship between the petitioner and the respondents 1, 2 and 3 shall cease to exist from this date.
6) The petitioner has agreed not to raise any dispute or make any other claim against respondents 1, 2 and 3 in respect of services rendered or thereafter.
7) The petitioner humbly prays that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to permit the petitioner to spread the amount of Rs.7,00,000/- paid towards ex-gratia as mentioned in clause (1) above for the period from 01.10.2010 to 31.08.2011, to enable the petitioner to avail the benefit of relief under Section 89 of the Income Tax Act and/or any other provision of the Income Tax Act as per judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sundaram Motors Vs. Ameer Jan reported in 1984 (2) LLJ 22 equivalent to 1985 (1) SCC 118.
8) The petitioner and respondents 1, 2 and 3 humbly pray that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to dispose of the above writ petition in terms of this joint memo, in the interest of justice.
4. The petitioner had challenged the termination order dated 01.10.2010, before this Court. However, as the dispute has now been settled between the parties, no further directions needs to be issued in the present writ petition. Therefore, the writ petition stands disposed of in terms of the settlement.
Sd/- JUDGE Np/-