- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41248 WP No. 19945 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 19945 OF 2024 (L-TER) BETWEEN: THE MANAGEMENT OF M/S. KANORIA PLASCHEM LTD., REGISTERED OFFICE AND WORKS NO.121-A, BOMMASANDRA, INDUSTRIAL AREA, BENGALURU - 560 099. (COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956) REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR MR. SIDDHARTHA KANORIA. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ANAND K.R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE LABOUR OFFICER AND THE AUTHORITY APPOINTED UNDER THE PAYMENT OF SUBSISTENCE ALLOWANCE ACT BENGALURU SUB DIVISION - 6, DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, KARMIKA BHAVANA, BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 029. 2. MR. RENUKAPPA G., C/O. KARNATAKA WORKERS' UNION Digitally signed by THEJAS KUMAR N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41248 WP No. 19945 of 2024 V.G.GOPAL BUILDING, NO.20/1, LALBAGH FORT ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 004. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K.P.YOGANNA, AGA FOR R1; SRI. V.S.NAIK, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER Sri.Anand.K.R., counsel for the petitioner and Sri.V.S.Naik., counsel for respondent No.2 have appeared through video conferencing. Sri.K.P.Yoganna., AGA for respondent No.1 has appeared in person. 2. The order dated 25.07.2023 passed by the first respondent vide Annexure-A is called into question in this Writ Petition on several grounds as set-out in the Memorandum of Writ Petition. 3. Counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the Writ papers with care. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41248 WP No. 19945 of 2024 4. Counsel for the petitioner in presenting his arguments strenuously urged that payment of subsistence allowance beyond the date of retirement could not have been ordered by the first respondent. In my view, counsel for the petitioner is justified in raising the said contention. The law is well settled that subsistence allowance cannot be awarded beyond the date of retirement. Hence, the first respondent is not justified in ordering subsistence allowance beyond the date of retirement. The order passed by the first respondent is liable to be set-aside. Accordingly, it is set-aside. If the second respondent claims arrears, if any, as per the provisions of law, the same shall be considered in accordance with the law by the Management. 5. The Writ of Certiorari is ordered. The order dated 25.07.2023 passed by the first respondent vide Annexure-A is quashed. 6. Resultantly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. SD/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE TKN List No.: 2 Sl No.: 11