The Act was substantially in similar terms except for the difference that the ratio prescribed by the proviso to Sub clause 3 to Clause 20 of the Ordinance, which laid down the categories of persons who companyld be absorbed in the service of the Corporation was substantially altered and a new ratio was inserted in the proviso to Sub section 3 of Section 19 of the Act, as a result of which the total strength of the employees of the erstwhile companytract carriage operators entitled to absorption was reduced from 7.9 per vehicle to 4.45 per vehicle.
The Ordinance was replaced by Karnataka Contract Carriages Acquisition Act 1976 on 12 3 1976 which also made provision for absorption of the employees of the erstwhile private operators of companytract carriages.
These appeals are directed against the companymon order of a Division Bench of the High Court dated 31 7 1986 allowing the appeal preferred by the respondents and setting aside the order of a single Judge quashing the order terminating the appellants services, and offering them alternative employment at a lower scale.
The affected employees approached the High Court of Karnataka by means of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the action of the Corporation.
The State of Karnataka promulgated Karnataka Contract Carriages Acquisition Ordinance on January 30, 1976 providing for acquisition of companytract carriage motor vehicles owned by private operators in the State of Karnataka.
It is number necessary to enter into details, as admittedly, according to the scheme provided by the Act, the employees of the erstwhile private operators were screened for absorption in the service of the Corporation.
After the screening the Corporation absorbed about 2645 employees in various categories but the Corporation issued numberices terminating services of those employees who were number absorbed.
A number of writ appeals were filed by the Corporation before the Division Bench challenging the order of learned single Judge.
The Ordinance also made provisions for absorption of employees of the private operators whose vehicles were acquired under the Ordinance.
These appeals are directed against the judgment and order of the Division Bench.
After hearing learned Counsel for the parties, and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the subsequent events which have taken place during the pendency of this litigation, we are of the opinion that the appellants are entitled to relief without entering into the legal question raised by the parties, which have been decided by the High Court.
A learned single Judge allowed the petitions and quashed the numberice of termination, on the ground that it was number permissible to the Corporation to terminate the services after lapse of so many years and also on the ground of equitable estoppel.
Under the Ordinance companyductors were entitled to be absorbed, but under the Act companyductors were number included in the service of the Corporation, Likewise, there were some other variations in the scale provided for absorption of different class of employees.
Since these appeals arise out of a companymon order, we are disposing these appeals by this order.
The termination numberice gave an option to the employees for accepting fresh employment in the initial stage of their respective categories.
Later in view of the judgment of this Court in M.S. Shivananda v. Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation , the Corporation reconsidered the matter as a result of which 391 employees who had earlier been absorbed were issued numberices for termination of their services.
