Sri.K.S. Chandrashekar v. The Divisional Controller and Appointing Authority

NC:(2025:KHC:54509-DB( WA(No.(1403(of(2024( ( , ,,HC-KAR( ( ( IN(THE(HIGH(COURT(OF(KARNATAKA(AT(BENGALURU(

THDATED(THIS(THE(19 (DAY(OF(DECEMBER,(2025(

PRESENT( THE(HON'BLE(MR.(JUSTICE(D(K(SINGH( AND(( THE(HON'BLE(MS.(JUSTICE(TARA(VITASTA(GANJU( WRIT(APPEAL(NO.(1403(OF(2024((S-KSRTC)( BETWEEN:(( (

SRI.,K.S.CHANDRASHEKAR, S/O,A.S.SHANKARAPPA,,, AGED,ABOUT,39,YEARS,,, R/O,KAMBINAYAKANAHALLI,VILLAGE,,,

M.GOLLAHALLI,POST,,CHINTAMANI,TALUK,, CHIKKABALLAPURA,DISTRICT-517,247., …APPELLANT, (BY,SRI.,MUKKANNAPPA,S,B,,ADVOCATE),

AND:( (

1., THE,DIVISIONAL,CONTROLLER,, AND,APPOINTING,AUTHORITY,, K.S.R.T.C.,,CHIKKABALLAPUR,DIVISION,, CHIKKABALLAPUR,, REPRESENTED,BY,ITS,CHIEF,LAW,OFFICER., ,

2., THE,APPELLATE,AUTHORITY,, K.S.R.T.C.,,CENTRAL,OFFICE,,, SHANTINAGAR,,BANGALORE,,, , , ,

NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER. &RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. H.R.RENUKA., ADVOCATE)

THIS WRIT APPEAL FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 01/07/2024 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WP NO.14993/2023 AND CONSEQUENTLY DISMISS THE WRIT PETITION NO.14993/2023 FILED BY THE RESPONDENTS CORPORATION AND CONFIRM THE AWARD PASSED BY THE PRELIMINARY DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT CHIKKABALLAPUR, PASSED IN I.D.REF.NO.8/2020

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 MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH)

The present writ appeal has been filed impugning the judgment and order dated 01.07.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.14993/2023 preferred by the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as KSRTC) against the award of Labour Court dated 14.07.2022 passed in ID No.08/2020.

¶2The parties are referred to as per their ranking in the writ petition for the sake of convenience.

¶3Briefly the facts are stated as the respondent was selected in the KSRTC for the post of 'Driver - cum - Conductor' and he was placed on probation on 07.05.2015. On completion of the probation, his services came to be confirmed. On

26.08.2017, the respondent was on duty in the bus having registration No.F-880, plying on the route - Bangalore to Mudigubba. The bus was checked by the flying squad of the KSRTC, and it was found that there were 21 + 01 + 09 passengers and 5 passengers holding daily pass in the bus. The Checking Officer submitted the report about the misconduct committed by the respondent. Thereafter he was issued articles of charge on 01.09.2017 to which he did not submit any reply.

¶4On conclusion of the domestic enquiry, a show cause notice was issued to the respondent proposing the punishment of dismissal from service, and after, considering the reply, disciplinary authority inflicted the punishment of

dismissal from service on the respondent with effect from

20.06.2018. The appellate authority dismissed his appeal vide order dated 10.09.2018.

¶5The respondent raised an industrial dispute under Section 10(1)(c) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 in ID No.08/2018. The Labour Court vide award dated 14.07.2022 allowed the claim of the respondent in part and directed his reinstatement into service without backwages, however, with continuity of service with the last pay drawn by withholding three increments with cumulative effect.

¶6This award of the Labour Court dated 14.07.2022 came to be challenged by the KSRTC, the petitioner. The learned Single Judge having considered the past misconducts as well as the misconduct in the present case in a short span of time i.e., from 2015 to 2017, went on to hold that the Labour Court was not justified in setting aside the order of punishment. The Tribunal had failed to take into consideration the relevant facts, and therefore, allowed the writ petition and set aside the award.

¶7The learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the Labour Court has held that there was no financial implication to the petitioner - Corporation in the alleged misconduct committed by the respondent - workman. She has also submitted that under Section 11-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, the Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court has power to interfere with the order of punishment of dismissal and removal from service considering the nature of accusations and the material brought on record, if the Labour Court can find that the punishment of dismissal from service is harsh and excessive.

¶8As we have noted that in a very short span of time the respondent had committed as many as 19 misconduct of similar nature, the fact would reveal that the respondent's integrity is highly doubtful, and such a person is not entitled to retain in the service. We therefore, of the view that the learned Single Judge has correctly taken the view and interfered with the impugned award passed by the Labour Court. We have gone through the judgment and also the award passed by the Labour Court, we are of the opinion that the learned Single

Judge has rightly set aside the award passed by the Labour Court which does not require an interference by this Court. Therefore, we dismiss the appeal. All pending applications are also rejected.

(D K SINGH) JUDGE

(TARA VITASTA GANJU) JUDGE

YKL List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA