- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3559 WP No. 103162 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 103162 OF 2024 (L-KSRTC) BETWEEN: THE MANAGEMENT OF NWKRTC, CENTRAL OFFICE, R/BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, CENTRAL OFFICE, GOKUL ROAD, HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRASHANT S. HOSMANI, ADVOCATE) AND: VIRUPAXAPPA S/O. MALLAPPA KONNUR, AGE: 64 YEARS, OCC: NIL, R/O. SHAHAPURPETH, BASAVANAGAR, DIST: GADAG-580028. …RESPONDENT (NOTICE TO RESPONDENT IS DISPENSED WITH) --- THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER DATED 14/12/2023 PASSED BY THE ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, GADAG IN APPLICATION NO.10/2017 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) 1. Notice to the respondent is dispensed with in view of the proposed order to be passed. ASHPAK KASHIMSA MALAGALADINNI Digitally signed by ASHPAK KASHIMSA MALAGALADINNI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench Date: 2025.02.25 15:12:51 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3559 WP No. 103162 of 2024 2. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: i. Issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, order dated 14/12/2023 passed by the addl. District and Sessions Judge, Gadag in Application No.10/2017 produced at Annexure-A in the interest of justice and equity. ii. Pass such other and further orders as this Hon’ble Court deems just and necessary to pass in the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. Respondent workman had filed application No.10/2017 under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (‘ID Act’, for short), seeking for payment of leave encashment benefits, along with interest at 10% p.a. The Labour Court allowed the said application. It is challenging the same, the petitioner Corporation is before this Court. 4. The submission of Sri. Prashant Hosamani, learned counsel for the petitioner Corporation is that, the application for leave encashment was filed with a delay of one year and as such, ought not to have been entertained by the Labour Court. His further submission is that, leave encashment is not wages - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3559 WP No. 103162 of 2024 and it could not have been sought for under Section 36(2) of the ID Act. 5. Heard Sri.Prashant S. Hosamani, learned counsel for the petitioner Corporation and perused the papers. 6. The leave encashment is availed of by a workman or employee as regards the leave already accrued to the account of workman/employee. Thus the leave standing to the credit of the workman, he would be entitled to leave in terms of the absence from work and/or encashment in lieu thereof. Therefore, if a request is made for encashment, the same would form part of the wages. 7. In that view of the matter, the same would be covered by Section 33-C(2) of the ID Act. There would be no requirement for raising Industrial Dispute. Hence, I do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the Labour Court. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3559 WP No. 103162 of 2024 8. Hence, the petition is dismissed. The time granted by the Labour Court is extended for a period of 30 days from today, for compliance. Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE gab CT-MCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11