S.P. KRISHNA S/O T. PUTTEGOWDA, SRI. S.T. THAYAPPA S/O LATE THAMMANAPPA AND SRI. M.R.D. GUPTA S/O SRI. RAMASANJIVA SHETTY Vs. THE KARNATAKA CO-OPERATIVE MILK PRODUCERS FEDERATION LTD. REP. BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition coming on for preliminary hearing (B Group) is considered for final disposal having regard to the facts and circumstances.

(2.) THE learned Counsel for the Respondent seeks time to file statement of objections. It is seen that the matter is of the year 2008 and as shall be presently pointed out, there is no objection that can be raised insofar as the case of the Petitioners are concerned.

(3.) THE learned Counsel for the Petitioners would primarily contend that there is no basis for the Federation to have restricted the financial benefits to which the Petitioners were entitled from a date anterior to 30.6.2001. The order dated 20.12.2007 merely extends financial benefits from 30.6.2001. This according to the learned Counsel for the Petitioners is possibly on account of the observations made by the Tribunal in the appeals filed by the Federation, as already stated, in Appeal No. 606/97 and connected appeals, wherein the Tribunal has incidentally noted that insofar as the contention as regards Dr. H. Hanumanthappa and other senior Officers not being entitled to financial benefits with retrospective effect has been taken as a direction to extend such financial benefits only with effect from the date of dismissal of the appeals by the Tribunal. Incidentally, the learned Counsel for the Petitioners points out that the appeals were filed by the Federation and not by the Petitioners. In the further proceedings in W.P. No. 2911/06 which was disposed of on 10.10.2006, this Court has clearly held that the seniority list has to be prepared in terms of the directions issued by the Additional Registrar of Co -Operative Societies dated 22.2.97 and the consequences of such seniority list prepared would follow automatically, which according to the learned Counsel for the Petitioners would include the financial benefits accrued to the Petitioners on the seniority list being prepared. The observations of the Tribunal therefore merged with the order of this Court and would no longer relate to the financial benefits being denied to the Petitioner and the said observation of the Tribunal was therefore illegal and cannot be sustained.