Limitation Act Inapplicable To Section 10 ID Act | HC

Case Details: Karnataka Power Corporation Ltd. vs. Ganapathi Gajanana Bhat - [2025] 181 taxmann.com 133 (HC - Karnataka)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• B M Shyam Prasad, J.
• Sumit Chatterjee, Adv. for the Petitioner.
• Neeraj Sastry, Adv. for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

In the instant case, the Respondent-workman was dismissed in 1998 for the alleged cash shortage. In Reference, the Labour Court held the dismissal unjustified and awarded 75% back wages from the date of dismissal till superannuation, with continuity of service and all retirement benefits, noting that he was removed for no fault of his.

The employer filed an instant writ petition contending that the respondent had not proved non-gainful employment and that awarding 75% back wages with all benefits was unwarranted.

The Respondent relied on his sworn statement under Section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and the grant of 17B relief in the earlier writ, and on the earlier direction for 50% interim wages, to contend that back wages with continuity of service were justified.

It was noted that since respondent had filed an affidavit for relief under Section 17B of the Act, and was granted such relief on strength of his assertion that he was not gainfully employed in 2004 and that he had remained without gainful employment on same terms as he was employed with the petitioner, it would be sufficient to conclude that the petitioner had discharged initial burden.

High Court Held

The High Court held that since the Labour Court had granted 75% of wages with all benefits including continuity of service but without providing for any deduction towards relief under Section 17B that was granted for over a period of almost four years between 2004 to 2008, and this would be a very material circumstance as also fact that respondent had not been in employment with petitioner for over two decades prior to his superannuation.

Thus, the Labour Court’s order on back wages was to be modified, and the petitioner was to be directed to pay back wages to the respondent at 50% from the date of his termination to the date of his superannuation, along with the benefits awarded by the Tribunal.

List of Cases Referred to

• Prabhakar v. Joint Director, Sericulture Department [2015] 9 taxmann.com 784 (SC) (para 4)
• Deepali Gundu Surwase v. Kranti Junior Adhyapak Mahavidyalaya (D.ED.) (2013) 10 SCC 324 (para 6)
• Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Jaipur v. Phool Chand (2018) 18 SCC 299 (para 6.1).