MANAGING DIRECTOR, KARNATAKA STATE ROAD CORPORATION, BENGALURU AND OTHERS Vs. SIDDAPPA REVANAPPA HARIJAN AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondents.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioners firstly submitted that this court has not considered 32 independent Writ Petitions filed by the respondents against the orders passed by the Labour Court and against which orders, the Writ Appeals are filed independently by the parties. Secondly, the learned counsel for the petitioners, appellants in Writ Appeal No. 200419/2014 [LKSRTC] contended that at paragraph 15, in the 3rd line of page 15 of the judgment dated 17.9.2019, there is a wrong mention of the ruling i.e., in the case of KSRTC and another and B.B. Tabusi & others, 2000 ILR(Kar) 2156 which is no way connected with the Writ Petition Nos. 29653/1998. Therefore, it is contended that there is a mistake on the face of the records and the said mistake requires to be corrected.

(3.) We have carefully perused the judgment dated 17.9.2018 (Reported in 2018 (4) AKR 664) passed in Writ Appeal No. 200419/2014 by us, wherein at paragraph 7 of the judgment, it is mentioned with regard to the disposal of 32 claim petitions by the Labour Court, which are challenged in Writ Petition No. 22242/2001 (L-K) came to be allowed by an order dated 19.8.2004.