- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51230 RP No. 249 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD REVIEW PETITION NO.249 OF 2025 BETWEEN: M/S THE DECORATIVE LAMINATES (INDIA) PVT LTD NO.67, YELWALA ROAD BELAVADI, MYSURU - 570 019. REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR SRI. ABBAS S. VAGH AGED ABOUT 88 YEARS REGISTERED UNDER COMPANIES ACT, 1956 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SOMASHEKAR., ADVOCATE) AND: SRI. H S RAMESH S/O SIDDEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51230 RP No. 249 of 2025 R/AT NO.34, HULYALU VILLAGE NAGAVALA POST YELWALA HOBLI MYSURU - 571 130 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. K.GOVINDARAJ., ADVOCATE) THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 & SECTION 114 OF CPC, 1908 PRAYING TO REVIEW THAT PORTION OF THE ORDER DATED 21.04.2025 IN WRIT PETITION NO.11756/2017, ALLOW THE REVIEW PETITION TO THAT EXTENT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51230 RP No. 249 of 2025 ORAL ORDER This Court has allowed the respondent's writ petition in W.P. No.11756/2017 by order dated 21.04.2025 quashing the Industrial Tribunal's Order dated 16.02.2017 in Serial Application No.1/2016 declaring that the respondent shall be treated as reinstated with effect from 18.04.2016 and he shall be admitted to all consequential benefits including continuity in service. This Court has further directed the petitioner to pay 25% of the difference between the amount that he would have been entitled for as an Operator and the amount which is actually paid to him. 2. The petitioner, who has to answer the respondent's claim for the period between 18.04.2016 and to the date of this court's order, seeks review of this Court's order dated 21.04.2025 asserting that the petitioner has continued the respondent in the position that he held before the dismissal that was - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51230 RP No. 249 of 2025 put in dispute, and that he is admitted to all wages and allowances permissible. Sri Somashekar, the learned counsel for the petitioner, while reiterating the afore on the previous occasion, had submitted that by inadvertence it was placed before this Court that the respondent was working as a 'Casual Labour' on daily wages consequent to the conciliation proceedings on 15.04.2016. 3. Sri K. Govindaraju, the learned counsel for the respondent, was reserved with liberty to secure instructions on the dues. The learned counsel is unable to secure any instructions on whether any due remains unpaid; more importantly, the assertion that the respondent has been reinstated to the position that he held as of the date of the dismissal is not disputed. In which event, the directions to pay the difference amount must be reviewed. 4. The petition is therefore allowed in part and this Court's order dated 21.04.2025 in the writ - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51230 RP No. 249 of 2025 petition in W.P. No.11756/2017 is reviewed to the extent that there is a direction to the petitioner to pay 25% of the difference between the amount that is paid to the respondent as an 'Operator' and the amount which is actually paid to him from 18.04.2016. Consequently, the direction at [C] in the order dated 21.04.2025 is also reviewed. Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE AN/-