- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14167-DB WA No. 969 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF WRIT APPEAL NO. 969 OF 2025 (L-PG) BETWEEN: 1. THE MANAGER M/S. BHARATH BEEDI WORKS (P) LTD., ULLAL BRANCH, ULLAL, MANGALORE-575020 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. NATARAJA BALLAL A., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY LABOUR COMMISSIONER & APPELLATE AUTHORITY UNDER THE PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT, 1972 HASSAN REGION, HASSAN 573201 2. THE ASSISTANT LABOUR COMMISSIONER AND CONTROLLING AUTHORITY UNDER THE PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT, 1972, MANGALORE DIVISION, MANGALORE-560027 3. SMT. BHAVANI W/O K. RAVINDRA, DECCAN HOUSE, KUTTARA PADAVU, MUNNARU POST, MANGALORE-560027 4. SRI BABU SHETTY BHARATH BEEDI CONTRACTOR, DESODI KUTTAR, Digitally signed by VASANTHA KUMARY B K Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14167-DB WA No. 969 of 2025 MUNNARU GRAMA, MANGALORE-560027 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.N. SUDEV HEGDE., AGA FOR RESPONDENTS) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE COMMON ORDER DATED 08/04/2025 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DISMISSING THE WP No.22218/2013 AND ALLOW THE WRIT PETITION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH) The present intra Court appeal has been filed impugning the judgment and order dated 08.04.2025 passed by the writ Court in W.P.No.22218/2013 filed by the appellant. 2. The parties are referred to as per their ranking before the writ Court, for the sake of convenience. 3. The petitioner is having license under the Beedi and Cigar Workers (Conditions of Employment) Act, 1966 (for - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14167-DB WA No. 969 of 2025 short 'the Beedi Act'). Petitioner approached the writ Court, being aggrieved by the orders passed by the authorities under the provisions of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (for short 'the Gratuity Act') dated 10.02.2012 and the Order in Appeal dated 02.04.2013. The appellant had already paid the gratuity amount as determined to the respondent/workers and therefore, the writ Court did not interfere with regard to the facts involved in the present case. The writ Court has made it clear that the impugned judgment shall not be treated as a precedent in future. 4. Considering the aforesaid fact, we do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned judgment and order dated 08.04.2025, as the learned Single Judge has clarified that the impugned judgment has been passed in the peculiarity of the facts and circumstances of the case and shall not be considered as a precedent. 5. In view thereof, we dismiss this appeal. However, we keep the question of law open. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14167-DB WA No. 969 of 2025 6. In view dismissal of the appeal pending interim applications, if any do not survive for consideration, hence stand disposed of. Sd/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE NG CT: SN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5