IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND WRIT APPEAL NO. 3256 OF 2019 (L-KSRTC)

BETWEEN:

THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER K.S.R.T.C., DAVANAGERE DIVISION DAVANAGERE - 577 001 NOW REPRESENTED BY: THE CHIEF LAW OFFICER K.S.R.T.C., CENTRAL OFFICES K.H. ROAD, SHANTHI NAGAR Digitally signed by K G BANGALORE-560 027 RENUKA MBA Location:

HIGH COURT …APPELLANT OF (BY SRI. B S SRINIVAS, ADV. FOR KARNATAKA SRI. B L SANJEEV, ADVOCATE)

AND:

SRI J RAMULU S/O ANJINAPPA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, KSRTC BUS DRIVER, DAVANAGERE DEPOT, DAVANAGERE DIVISION DAVANAGERE-577 001 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. M T JAGAN MOHAN, ADV. FOR CAVEATOR/RESPONDENT IN CP NO.783/2019)

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DTD 18/07/2019 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WP NO.16342/2018 AND CONSEQUENTLY DISMISS WP NO.16342/2018.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI)

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

2. The contention of learned counsel for the appellant is that the Disciplinary Authority who is the appellant, while exercising the powers under the amended Regulation of KSRTC Employees (Conduct & Discipline) Regulations, 1971 imposed the penalty of reduction in basic pay of the respondent - driver to the minimum of basic pay of the drivers’ post and directed to treat the suspension period as not on duty. It is contented that an enquiry report and the findings therein were considered by the Disciplinary Authority who also considered the FIR lodged by the Department and found that the occurrence of the accident was proved and from the spot panchanama, the occurrence of the incident was found. The allegation against the respondent was that due to the negligence of the respondent in driving the bus inside the depot, he dashed the bus against two technical staffs, due to which one of them sustained serious injuries and succumbed in the hospital, while the other staff was under treatment for injuries to his left leg and arms. Therefore, the charge against the driver was found to have been correctly proved and accordingly, the order imposing penalty was passed.

3. An industrial dispute was raised by the respondent workmen, which came to be referred by the State Government and was registered as ID No.192/2012 before the Industrial Tribunal, Hubballi. After considering the record, the Tribunal held that the issue as to the fairness of domestic enquiry conducted had been held in the affirmative holding that the domestic enquiry was conducted in a fair and proper manner. The perversity or otherwise and an illegality, if any, was verified by the Tribunal and it came to the conclusion that the enquiry finding in no way could be termed as either perverse or illegal. Accordingly, the reference was rejected and the order of punishment dated 22.05.2009 passed by the appellant -

Disciplinary Authority was confirmed.

4. In the writ petition filed before this Court challenging the award, the learned Judge allowed the writ petition of the respondent holding that the respondent was acquitted in the criminal proceedings. Moreover, it was observed that there was no iota of evidence to contend that there is negligence on part of the petitioner - respondent in causing the accident, which resulted in death of a staff of the KSRTC. The learned Judge went on to hold that in the absence of corroborative evidence and any eyewitness, one could not draw inference that there was a negligence on the part of the petitioner - respondent in causing accident. Accordingly, the award dated 02.04.2016 was set aside and the order of penalty imposed by the appellant was also set aside. The appellant - respo