Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH
S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV, RAJESH RAI K, JJ
THE COMMISSIONER CITY CORPORATION, VIJAYAPUR – Appellant
Versus
RAHIM ABDULRAHIM S/O KHAWJASAB @KHAJASAHEB TAJIMTARK – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts of employment and claims. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. arguments regarding the validity of settlements. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. court's analysis of settlement implications. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 4. final ruling on claims and payments. (Para 19 , 20) |
ORAL JUDGMENT
The present appeal is filed by the Commissioner, City Corporation, Vijayapura calling in question the correctness of the order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.202284/2021 dated 09.09.2024 whereby the petition filed by the appellant seeking to set aside the order of settlement entered into in relation to the proceedings under Section 33-C (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short, ‘ID Act’) came to be rejected.
3. The facts leading to present round of litigation are that the workmen had joined the services of the employer as Watermen in the year 1985 and their services have been extended with benefit of Time Scales. It is asserted that the services of the workmen were orally terminated on 20.01.1986. In connection with such oral order of termination, the disputes were raised and reference is made to the Labour Court for their retrenchment in KID No.196/1
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
