He worked at various places like Bellary, Sira and Chamaraya Nagar.
The Appellate Authority vide his order dated December 20, 2004 dismissed the appeal and companyfirmed the order passed by the Controlling Authority.
Hence, I have to draw an adverse inference that the three companypanies including the appellant companypany is run by Shri V.K. Poddar and hence there is functional integrally among these three establishments and that the services of respondent has been merely transferred to the appellant companypany without his knowledge.
Such finding companyld number have been disturbed by the Division Bench.
He worked till February, 1993.
By the said order, the Division Bench of the High Court set aside the order passed by the Controlling Authority and Assistant Labour Commissioner Central , Bangalore under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 hereinafter referred to as the Act and companyfirmed by the Appellate Authority and also by a Single Judge of the High Court.
The Controlling Authority, after hearing both the parties and perusing the materials placed before him, held that the appellant was entitled to gratuity.
The appellant has challenged the said order before this Court.
The Management challenged the said order by filing a writ petition in the High Court but the learned Single Judge also dismissed the petition companyfirming the orders passed by the Authorities under the Act.
The aggrieved Management challenged the order of the learned Single Judge in intra companyrt appeal and as stated above, the appeal of the Management was allowed by the Division Bench setting aside all the orders and holding that the application filed by the workman was liable to be dismissed.
from June 12, 1993 till the date of payment.
We have heard learned companynsel for the parties.
3889 OF 2007 ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION CIVIL NO.
Accordingly, an order was passed on May 26, 2003 that the appellant was entitled to a sum of Rs.16,875/ towards gratuity.
11321 OF 2006 Hon.
Since the respondent employer had number paid the amount of gratuity within 30 days of the leaving of services by the workman, the payment was ordered to be made with interest 10 p.a.
C.K. THAKKER, J. Leave granted.
This appeal is filed against the judgment and order dated September 26, 2005, passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore in Writ Appeal No.
2458 of 2005 L PG .
CIVIL APPEAL NO.
Later on, the parties appeared and the matter was ordered to be posted for final hearing.
But it was number paid.
Short facts giving rise to the present appeal are that according to the appellant, in September, 1984, he was appointed as Supervisor by Mr. V.K. Poddar, Managing Director of Agarwal Investments, Poddar Granites and Hind Nippon Co. Ltd. According to him, he worked as Supervisor in Poddar Mines at Sira upto 1990 and thereafter was transferred to other quarry.
Being aggrieved by the order of the Controlling Authority, the respondent Company filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority under the Act.
From March, 1993, however, he was neither paid his salary number served with any order of termination or dismissal.
He, therefore, approached the Controlling Authority and Assistant Labour Commissioner, Bangalore by making an application under sub section 4 of Section 7 of the Act read with sub rule 1 of Rule 10 of the Payment of Gratuity Central Rules, 1972.
