- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:9655-DB WA No. 279 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V KAMESWAR RAO AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T.M.NADAF WRIT APPEAL NO. 279 OF 2024 (S-RES) BETWEEN: M. ASHOK KUMAR, S/O LATE MARIAPPA, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, DEPT OF PB NO. 6321/68160-93, R/AT NO. 107/6, 'B' STREET, JAYARAJ NAGAR, VIVEKNAGAR POST, BANGALORE - 560 047. …APPELLANT (BY SMT. KAMALA KUMARI M, ADVOCATE) AND: H.R. DEPARTMENT, THE MANAGEMENT OF HINDUSTAN AERONAUTICS LTD., HELICOPTER DIVISION (HC), VIMANAPURA POST, BANGALORE - 560 017, THE RESPONDENT IS BEING REPRESENTED BY ITS SENIOR MANAGER H.R. SMT. TARANI RANJAN PATRO. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. K.S. BHEEMAIAH, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by K G RENUKAMBA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:9655-DB WA No. 279 of 2024 THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 24/03/2023, PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WP NO.9630/2022, AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENT MANAGEMENT TO PAY THE BENEFITS THAT THE APPELLANT IS ENTITLED AND ALSO TO PASS ANY OTHER ORDER/s THAT THIS IS HONBLE COURT MAY BE DEEMED FIT AND PROPER UNDER THE GIVEN FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V KAMESWAR RAO and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T.M.NADAF ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V KAMESWAR RAO) This intra-Court appeal arises from order dated 24.03.2023 in writ petition No.9630/2022 whereby, the learned Single Judge has dismissed the petition filed by the appellant herein by stating in paragraph No.5 as under:- "Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties, I have carefully examined the writ papers and it is not in dispute that the service of the petitioner was terminated by accepting resignation letter on - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:9655-DB WA No. 279 of 2024 13.04.1993 and the petitioner has filed IA No.384 of 2006 before the Labour Court, Bengaluru for claiming back wages and other consequential benefits and the said claim petition came to be dismissed on 23.02.2007. I have also noticed from the impugned order produced at Annexure-P that settlement has been made by respondent-authority on 01.05.2000 itself and in that view of the matter, the petitioner cannot claim for settlement of his service benefits after 30 years i.e. after his termination from service and therefore, I find force in the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent-authority. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for the relief claimed in this writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed". 2. The issue before learned Single Judge was primarily for grant of the terminal benefits after the appellant had resigned from the respondent-organization by tendering resignation. 3. The case of the appellant is that except GPF he has not been paid other benefits. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:9655-DB WA No. 279 of 2024 4. It is a fact that the learned Single Judge has noted the fact in the year 2006, the appellant had raised an industrial dispute claiming back wages. The same came to be dismissed on 23.02.2007. It is much thereafter, the appellant had filed the aforesaid writ petition. 5. On 09.01.2025, we had asked for the presence of the Administrative Head of the respondent-company. The Officer namely, Mr.Tarani Ranjan Patro, Chief Manager (HR), Hindustan Aeronautics Limited, Helicopter Division (HC), Bengaluru was present in the Court, on 10.02.2025. We had interacted with him. He is also present before the Court, today. He submits that he has considered and discussed the issue of grant of ex gratia payment to the appellant with the other officers in the organization. He states that Rules do not permit for such payment. That apart, according to him, the record having been weaded out, it is difficult to ascertain when did the gratuity and other terminal benefits were paid to the respondent. 6. His submission is that the circumstances related to his resignation would definitely prove that the terminal benefits have been paid. This according to him is also because unlike - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:9655-DB WA No. 279 of 2024 GPF, the payment of Gratuity need to be made on the date the employee is relieved from service. In this case, the employee having resigned in the year 1993, it can be inferred that the gratuity amount has been paid to the appellant on the date he was relieved. 7. Having considered the claim made and also the conclusion drawn by the learned Single Judge and also having heard the Officer, we are of the view that the learned Single Judge is justified in dismissing the petition in the facts of this case. Accordingly, the appeal is also dismissed. In view of dismissal of Writ Appeal, I.A No.1/2021, 1/2024 and IA 2/2024 do not survive for consideration. Sd/- (V KAMESWAR RAO) JUDGE Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE VS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8 CT: BHK