IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU ON THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. G. PANDIT WRIT APPEAL NO.2357 OF 2017 AND WRIT APPEAL NOS.4763-4804 OF 2017 (S-RES) BETWEEN:
1. WORKMEN OF BHADRA SAHAKARI SAKKARE KARKHANE NIYAMITHA REPRESENTED BY THE CHITRADURGA DISTRICT MAZDOOR SANGHA THROUGH ITS PRESIDENT VINOBHA NAGAR, 12TH MAIN ROAD 9TH CROSS, DAVANAGERE-577006.
2. M B HITTALAMANI AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS SON OF BASAVANAGOWDA BASAVESHWARA LAYOUT MALEBENNURU DAVANAGERE-577530 HARIHAR TALUK.
3. S C SANNAMANI SON OF CHANNABASAPPA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, #1545, 11TH MAIN ROAD, 6TH CROSS, M.C.C.B.BLOCK, DAVANAGERE-577005.
4. B SHIVANANDAPPA SON OF NANJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, # 4TH MAIN ROAD, 5TH CROSS, VINOBA NAGAR, DAVANAGERE-577006.
5. P MARUTHI SON OF BYRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, # 874/3, ANEKONDAPET, SHIVAJINAGAR, DAVANAGERE-577001.
6. N K CHANDRAPPA SON OF KENCHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, DODDABATHI, DAVANAGERE-577566.
7. J PADMARAJA SON OF JINNAPPA NILANAHALLI, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, DODDABATHI, DAVANAGERE-577566.
8. D MAHENDRA SON OF ESHWARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, #470/8, 2ND FLOOR, 7TH MAIN ROAD, 7TH CROSS, P.J.LAYOUT, DAVANAGERE-577002.
9. P MALLIKARJUNA SON OF PATEL CHANDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, CARE OF M.C.PATIL AND BROTHERS, NEAR HALADAMMA TEMPLE ROAD, HALEPET, HONNALI, DAVANAGERE-577210.
10. SMT GANGAMMA WIFE OF THIPPESWAMY, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, #100, 5TH CROSS, LABOUR COLONY, NITTUVALLI ROAD, DAVANAGERE-577004.
11. PAVADAPPA SON OF LATE BHEEMAKPPA, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, #641, 2ND CROSS, BASAVARAJAPET, DAVANAGERE-577001.
12. R ANJANEYA SON OF RANGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, #702, CHALAWADI KERI BARLINE ROAD, DAVANAGERE-577001.
13. M.S.SIMHARAJU SINCE DEAD BY HIS LR's, 13(a) SMT SRILAKSHMI WIFE OF LATE M.S.SIMHARAJU, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.30, 16TH MAIN, 1ST ‘A’ CROSS, MAHADESHWAR NAGAR, B.T.M. 2ND STAGE, BENGALURU-560076.
13(b) SMT RASHMI DAUGHTER OF LATE M.S.SIMHARAJU, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, RESIDING AT NEW ZEALAND, 13(c) KUMARI RANJITHA DAUGHTER OF LATE M.S.SIMHARAJU, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.30, 16TH MAIN, 1ST ‘A’ CROSS, MAHADESHWAR NAGAR, B.T.M. 2ND STAGE, BENGALURU-560 076.
13(d) SMT. RAKSHITHA DAUGHTER OF LATE M.S.SIMHARAJU, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, RESIDING AT DUBAI.
14. T A SADASHIVAPPA SON OF KALLAPPA, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, #61/3, LABOUR COLONY, 3RD CROSS, DAVANAGERE-577004.
15. H SHARANAPPA SON OF DODDA SHARANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, #1242, THYAPERAGALLI, HONDADA RASTHE, DAVANAGERE-577030.
16. C MARTANDAPPA SON OF NEELAPPA, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, DODDABATHI, DAVANAGERE-577566, DAVANAGERE TALUK AND DISTRICT.
17. P G NAGAPPA SON OF REVANASIDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, DODDABATHI, DAVANAGERE-577566.
18. K PARASAPPA SINCE DECEASED REPRESENTED BY HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE SMT.SUVARNAMMA, WIFE OF LATE K.PARASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, M.C.C.B.BLOCK, NEAR SHANKARA LEELA GAS AGENCY OPPOSITE BALAMANDIRA OFFICE DAVANAGERE-577 005.
19. G B RUDRAPPA SINCE DECEASED REPRESENTED BY HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE SMT. C.GURUSHANTHAMMA, WIFE OF LATE G.B.RUDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, CHIKKANAGATHIHALLI-575121, DAVANAGERE TALUK & DISTRICT.
20. H NINGAPPA SINCE DECEASED REPRESENTED BY HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE SMT.GOWRAMMA, WIFE OF LATE NINGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, #1228, NALABAND STREET, KURUBARA KERI, DAVANAGERE-577 001.
21. M GUDDAPPA SINCE DECEASED REPRESENTED BY HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE SMT.YELLAMMA, WIFE OF LATE GUNDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, M.C.C.B.BLOCK, DAVANAGERE-577 005.
22. T VASUDEVA SON OF THYARA MALLACHAR, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, #608/A, NEAR ANJANEYA TEMPLE, CHIKKANAHALLI LAYOUT, NITTUVALLI LAYOUT, DAVANAGERE-577 004.
23. T R DWARAKANATHA SON OF RAMACHANDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, #738, ASHIRWAD BUILDING, NEAR MUNICIPAL COLONY, P.R.LAYOUT, 10TH MAIN, DAVANAGERE-577 002.
24. K T THIMMAPPA SON OF DODDA THIMMAPA, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, GOWRAMMA HALLI, THORANAHATTI, JOGGALUR TALUK-577 521, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT.
25. I M SOMASHEKARAIAH SON OF CHANDRASHEKARAIAH, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, DODDABATHI, DAVANAGERE-577 566.
26. T.RENUKA PRASAD SON OF A.S.THIPPESWAMY, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, CARE OF K.N.PARSHWANATH, YALIGARA KANA NEAR DUGGAMMA TEMPLE DAVANAGERE-577 001 27. RAMESH BABU SON OF SHYAMA RAO H AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, DODDABATHI DAVANAGERE-577 566 DAVANAGERE TALUK.
28. N.HALANAGOWDA SON OF SIDDANAGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, #682, 29/3, NEW MASJID ROAD, NITTUVALLI LAYOUT, DAVANAGERE-577 004.
29. S.N.VEERANNA AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, SON OF S.H.NARAYANAPPA, 3RD MAIN ROAD, 9TH CROSS, VINOBA NAGAR, DAVANAGERE-577 006.
30. S.A.MAKARI SON OF AJJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS, SHIMOGA ROAD, NEXT TO P.L.D. BANK HARIHARA-577 601 31. MAMMU SAB SON OF BUDEN SAB AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS NIGASARANAHALLI, KANAGANAHALLI POST, DAVANAGERE TALUK & DISTRICT.
32. MAHESHWARAPPA GOWDIGER SON OF MAHADEVAPPA AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, NILANAHALLI,DODDABATHI-577 566 DAVANAGERE TALUK & DISTRICT.
33. D.T.RAJANNA SON OF THAMMANNA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, DODDERI-577 522, GOLLARAHALLI, THALLAKERE TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT.
34. HAYATH KHAN SINCE DEAD BY HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES.
34(a) RAZIA BEGUM DAUGHTER OF LATE HAYATH KHAN, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, 34(b) NASEEMA BEGUM DAUGHTER OF LATE HAYATH KHAN, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, 34(c) DAVALATH KHAN DAUGHTER OF LATE HAYATH KHAN, AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS, 34(d) RESHMA BEGUM DAUGHTER OF LATE HAYATH KHAN, AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS, ALL ARE RESIDING AT 4TH MAIN, 3RD CROSS, VINOBHANAGAR, YALLAMMANAGAR, DAVANAGERE.
35. H.SHEKARAPPA SINCE DECEASED REPRESENTED BY HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE SMT.ANASUYAMMA WIFE OF LATE H.SHEKARAPPA AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, DODDABATHI DAVANAGERE-577 566 DAVANAGERE TALUK AND DISTRICT.
36. H.REVANAPPA SINCE DECEASED REPRESENTED BY HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE SMT. RATHNAMMA WIFE OF LATE REVANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, DODDABATHI DAVANAGERE-577 566 DAVANAGERE TALUK AND DISTRICT.
37. S.G.BORAIAH SINCE DECEASED REPRESENTED BY HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE SMT. THIPPAMMA WIFE OF LATE S.G.BORAIAH AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, NELAGETHANAHALLI POST, NAYAKANAHATTI HOBLI CHALLAKERE TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577 536 38. RAMAKRISHNA SINCE DECEASED REPRESENTED BY HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE SMT. THIMMAKKA, WIFE OF LATE RAMAKRISHNA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, CHIKKANAHALLI LAYOUT NITTUVALLI DAVANAGERE-577 004.
39. M.MALLAPPA SINCE DECEASED REPRESENTED BY HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE SMT. JAYAMMA WIFE OF LATE MALLAPPA, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, DODDABATHI, DAVANAGERE-577 566 DAVANAGERE TALUK AND DISTRICT.
40. PAVITHRA RAJ P.R. SINCE DECEASED REPRESENTED BY HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE SMT.P.R.PUSHPALATHA WIFE OF LATE PAVATHRA RAJ P.R. AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, DODDABATHI, DAVANAGERE-577 566 DAVANAGERE TALUK AND DISTRICT.
41. VARUNACHARI SINCE DEAD BY HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES.
41(a) LAKSHAMAMMA WIFE OF LATE VARUNACHARI AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, 41(b) RUDRACHARI SON OF LATE VARUNACHARI, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, 41(c) ANJANEYA SON OF LATE VARUNACHARI, ALL ARE RESIDING AT #44, GUDDADA CAMP, HALEBATHI ROAD, DODDABATHI, DAVANAGERE-577 566.
42. PRAVIN KUMAR SON OF ANANDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, GUDDADA CAMP, HALEBATHI ROAD, DODDABATHI, DAVANAGERE-577 566 ... APPELLANTS (BY SRI M NARAYANA BHAT, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES, VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU -560 001.
2. COMMISSIONER FOR CANE DEVELOPMENT AND DIRECTOR OF SUGAR, KHB COMPLEX, 5TH FLOOR F BLOCK, K.G.ROAD, BENGALURU -560 009.
3. THE ADMINISTRATOR BHADRA SAHAKARI SAKKARE KARKHANE NIYAMITHA AND DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DAVANAGERE DISTRICT. DAVANAGERE-570 003.
4. DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES AND MANAGING DIRECTOR BHADRA SAHAKARI SAKKARE KARKHANE NIYAMITHA VIDYA NAGARA DAVANAGERE-570 005.
5. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR GYANABA SUGAR AND DEVELOPERS LTD. (LESSEE OF BHADRA SAHAKARI SAKKARE KARKHANE NIYAMITHA DODDABATHI, DAVANAGERE TALUK AND DISTRICT-570 005.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI S.S.MAHENDRA, AGA FOR RESPONDENT Nos.1, 2 AND 4 SRI S.N.HATTI, ADVOCATE FOR CAVEATOR/RESPONDENT No.3) THESE APPEALS ARE FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE DATED 14/03/2017 PASSED IN WRIT PETITION NOS.14104-14146/2011 [S-RES] AND GRANT THE APPELLANTS ALL THE PRAYERS MADE IN THE WRIT PETITION.
THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, S.G.PANDIT J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT Aggrieved by the impugned order dated 14.03.2017 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.Nos.14104- 14146 of 2011, by which the petitions were disposed off as not maintainable and reserving liberty to the petitioners to seek remedy by raising the dispute under Section 70 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959, the writ petitioners are in appeal.
2. The petitioners filed writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the order bearing No.DSK/ESTS/52/2010-11 dated 01.10.2010 (Annexure-L) to the writ petitions and for a mandamus directing the respondents to re-fix the salary of the petitioners and compute all the entitlement of the petitioners including 10% of the back wages by taking into account the continuity of service and grant the terminal benefits and arrears of wages upon reinstatement. The petitioners state that they were terminated from service by the 3rd respondent. A settlement was arrived at between the Management and the Workmen to the effect that the Management to reinstate the petitioners with 40% back wages. Upon the agreement the petitioners withdrew their dispute before the Labour Court. Subsequently as the Management refused to implement the settlement, the petitioners filed W.P.No.13524 of 1999. In pursuance to the interim order, the petitioners were reinstated. As the petitioners were not paid current wages they filed contempt, which was dropped. The petitioners filed I.A.No.1/2001 in the said writ petition which was allowed directing the Management to pay the current wages. The Management challenged the same in Writ Appeal No.1845 of 2001, which came to be dismissed. The Management preferred civil appeal before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the same was allowed in part, directing the Management to pay 10% back wages instead of 40%, upholding the reinstatement. It is stated that the petitioners were not paid current wages. The petitioners made representations demanding current wages, increment and other benefits. The 2nd respondent by his communication dated 01.10.2010 informed the 3rd respondent stating that in obedience of the order of Hon’ble Supreme Court and High Court, the action has already been taken and workers have been paid increment and service benefits hence, no further action is needed. The petitioners have challenged the said internal communication between respondent Nos.2 and 3 in the instant writ petitions. The learned Single Judge has disposed off the writ petitions holding that writ petitions would not lie against the internal correspondence between respondent Nos.2 and 3 and reserving liberty to the petitioners to avail the remedy by raising the dispute. Aggrieved by the same the petitioners are in appeal.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsels for the respondents. Perused the appeal papers.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants would submit that the learned Single Judge committed an error in disposing off the writ petitions holding that Annexure-L is an internal correspondence and it is not an order. It is his contention that Annexure-L would definitely affect the rights of the petitioners. It is his further submission that the entitlement of the petitioners has been determined and the petitioners would be entitled for 10% back wages on the revised wages as ordered by the Hon’ble Apex Court.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents would support the order passed by the learned Single Judge and submit that the learned Single Judge has rightly disposed off the writ petitions.
6. Having heard the learned counsels for the parties and having perused the appeal papers including the order passed by the learned Single Judge, we are of the view that the order of the learned Single Judge is neither erroneous nor perverse for more than one reason. The petitioners have arrived at a settlement with the 3rd respondent-Management, in which the 3rd respondent agreed to reinstate the petitioners with 40% back wages. When the respondents failed to implement the said settlement, the petitioners approached this Court, wherein, it was ordered to reinstate the petitioners and to pay back wages as agreed. Against which, the respondent- Management filed writ appeal as well as the civil appeal before the Hon’ble Apex Court. The Hon’ble Apex Court allowed the civil appeal in part, directing the payment of 10% back wages upholding reinstatement. The grievance of the petitioners is that they have not been paid current wages. The petitioners made several representations demanding current wages, which were forwarded to the 2nd respondent. The 2nd respondent by communication dated 01.01.2010 informed the 3rd respondent that in pursuance to the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and High Court, the workers have been paid increment and service benefits, therefore, further action is not needed.
The said letter is an internal correspondence between respondent Nos.2 and 3. It has not culminated in any order affecting the rights of the petitioners. It is the say of the respondents that they have taken action in accordance with the order of the Hon’ble Apex Court and this Court, whereas the petitioners dispute the same. Hence, it is necessary to examine the factual position. Therefore, the learned Single Judge has rightly observed that the petitioners to seek remedy by raising the dispute under Section 70 of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959. Further learned Single Judge has protected the interest of the petitioners by making it clear that if the petitioners avail the alternate remedy within a period of 60 days, the time taken in prosecuting these petitions shall stand excluded and the dispute shall be decided without going into the question of delay. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the learned Single Judge has passed a reasoned order which is neither perverse nor erroneous so as to warrant interference. If the appellants/petitioners have not availed the alternate remedy as observed by the learned Single Judge till this date, they are at liberty to avail the same within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and if the remedy is availed within the time stated above, the time taken in prosecuting the writ petition as well as the appeal shall stand excluded and the dispute shall be decided on merits, without going into the question of delay.
7. No ground is made out to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, writ appeals are dismissed.
In view of dismissal of the appeals, pending IAs do not survive for consideration.
Sd/- Sd/-
JUDGE JUDGE SMJ/CT:bms