Conviction Under Section 409 IPC Postulates Strict Proof Of Entrustment; Suspicion However Grave Cannot Substitute Proof: Supreme Court Criminal Prosecution Emanating From Past Matrimonial Relationship Ought Not To Linger After Divorce: Supreme Court Negligence Of Previous Counsel Not A Ground To Reopen Concluded Pre-Charge Evidence Under Section 311 CrPC: Allahabad High Court Unregistered Agreement To Sell Cannot Protect Tenant's Possession Under Section 53A Transfer Of Property Act: Delhi High Court Certified Copies Of Registered Sale Deeds Admissible As Secondary Evidence Without Proving Loss Of Original: Gauhati High Court Counsel Representing Deceased Party Must Inform Court Of Death Under Order XXII Rule 10-A CPC: J&K High Court Son Staying In Father's House Out Of Love And Affection Is A Mere Licensee, Cannot Challenge Father's Title: Delhi High Court Conviction For Murder Cannot Stand Where Single Blow Inflicted In Sudden Fight Without Premeditation: Uttarakhand High Court Inability To Trace Suppliers Or Buyers No Ground For Custodial Interrogation Once Recovery Is Effected: Punjab & Haryana High Court Right To Assemble Peacefully To Celebrate Association Anniversary Is A Fundamental Right; Unlawful Assembly Per Se Not An Offence: Madras High Court Marriage Photographs Can Be Relied Upon To Estimate Quantity Of Gold Ornaments In Matrimonial Disputes: Kerala High Court POCSO Act Not Confined To Securing Convictions, Soul Of Law Lies In Preserving Childhood Dignity & Healing: Madras High Court Special Appeal Maintainable If Single Judge's Order Relates To Authority Acting Without Statutory Appellate Jurisdiction: Allahabad High Court Recall Of Witness For Cross-Examination Permissible On Newly Framed Issue Post-Remand Even If Disposal Timeline Is Fixed: Karnataka High Court Litigant Cannot Overcome Law Of Limitation By Shifting Blame On Counsel Through Inconsistent Stands: Madras High Court Cross-Cases Cannot Be Clubbed If Co-Accused In Complaint Case Is Absconding & Complainant Delayed Process: Allahabad High Court Cross-Cases Cannot Be Clubbed If Co-Accused In Complaint Case Is Absconding & Complainant Delayed Process: Allahabad High Court Preventive Detention Not Warranted If Person Can Be Dealt With Under Ordinary Laws; No Effort To Arrest In Pending Cases: Supreme Court Accused Languishing In Jail For 9 Years Deserves Bail; Right To Speedy Trial Under Article 21 Violated: Supreme Court Custodial Death | Pendency Of Criminal Trial No Bar For Awarding Compensation Under Public Law Remedy: Gauhati High Court Suit For Possession Under Section 6 Specific Relief Act Barred If Filed Beyond Six Months Of Dispossession: Madras High Court Subsequent Purchaser Is Representative Of Judgment Debtor, Separate Suit Challenging Execution Sale Barred Under Section 47 CPC: Kerala High Court Statutory Bail Restrictions Melt Down When Pre-Trial Detention Is Prolonged & Trial Is Unlikely To Conclude Soon: Delhi High Court Failure To Apprise Accused Of Right Under Section 50 NDPS Act Vitiates Search & Recovery: J&K & Ladakh High Court Section 12(5) Arbitration Act Inapplicable To Proceedings Commenced Before 2015 Amendment; Executing Court Can't Apply Neutrality Norms Retrospectively: Punjab & Haryana High Court Banks Can Share Sale Proceeds Of Secured Assets Outside Liquidation Estate With Homebuyers Under Compromise Agreement: Kerala High Court Election Disputes Must Be Resolved Expeditiously; Long Stays Render Adjudication A Mockery Of Justice: Madras High Court Delhi High Court Suspends LOC, Permits Businessman To Travel Abroad For Healthcare Conferences; Cites Roots In Society & Past Compliance Section 138 NI Act Complaint Not Maintainable By Third Party Who Is Neither Payee Nor Holder In Due Course: Allahabad High Court

Grants Relief to Employee for Delayed Departmental Action: Financial Loss and Mental Agony Merit Just Compensation:  High Court of Karnataka

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment reinforcing the rights of employees under suspension, the High Court of Karnataka, presided over by the Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum, delivered a landmark verdict in Writ Petition No.16678 of 2018 (S-RES), favoring petitioner Sri T K Srinivasa.

The judgment, dated January 22, 2024, ruled in favor of the petitioner against the Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited (KPTCL), granting relief in the form of interest on delayed payment of salary and the difference in salary from the date of suspension.

Justice Magadum, in his observation, noted the unwarranted delay and the procedural lapses on the part of the respondent corporation. "The delay in initiating a departmental enquiry and further delay in payment of arrears of salary post enquiry Officer’s findings reflects a clear violation of petitioner’s right to timely compensation," Justice Magadum observed.

The petitioner, Sri T K Srinivasa, challenged the endorsement dated 05.08.2017, which declined his request for interest on the delayed payment of salary and difference of salary during his suspension period. The petition was filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India.

The Court meticulously reviewed the sequence of events leading to the petitioner's prolonged suspension since 07.12.1998. The court emphasized the hardship and financial prejudice suffered by the petitioner due to the delay in initiating the departmental enquiry and subsequent payments after exoneration.

In a strong statement underlining the importance of fair treatment of employees, the Court declared, "The petitioner’s protracted ordeal, including suspension, removal from service and delay in initiating enquiry aligns with Court’s recognition that such circumstances warrant just compensation."

Upholding the petitioner's plea, the Court ordered the quashing of the impugned endorsement and directed the respondent corporation to pay interest on the delayed payment of the salary difference at the rate of 6% per annum.

This judgment is a significant stride in safeguarding the rights of employees under suspension and emphasizes the need for timely and fair administrative processes. Legal experts view this ruling as a precedent for future cases involving undue delays and procedural lapses in disciplinary proceedings against employees.

Date of Decision: 22nd January 2024

SRI T K SRINIVASA VS THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KPTCL

 

Latest Legal News