IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI M WRIT PETITION NO. 58747 OF 2013 (L-TER)

BETWEEN:

M/S. SODEXO FOOD SOLUTIONS INDIA PVT. LTD., 1^ST FLOOR, GEMSTAR COMMERCIAL COMPLEX, RAMACHANDRA LANE, KANCHAPADA, MALAD WEST, MUMBAI-400 064, REPRESENTED BY ITS VICE PRESIDENT-HR.

...PETITIONER (BY SRI. K.PRABHAKAR RAO, ADVOCATE)

AND:

B. KESHAVA MURTHY S/O LATE SRI. G.BALASUNDARAM, NO.465, 13^TH MAIN, OPP. PRIYADARSHINI CONVENT, MANJUNATHANAGAR III STAGE, RAJAJINAGAR, BANGALORE-560 010.

…RESPONDENT Digitally signed by P M R R EMCHANDRA (BY SRI.V.S.NAIK, ADVOCATE)

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS.

THIS WRIT PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR ORDERS AT PRINCIPAL BENCH BENGALURU ON 26.02.2026, LISTED FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDER AT DHARWAD BENCH THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING, THIS DAY, THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED AS UNDER:

CAV ORDER

Sri.K.Prabhakar Rao, counsel for the petitioner and Sri.V.S.Naik, counsel for the respondent, appeared in person.

2. The captioned Writ Petition is filed seeking a Writ of Certiorari to quash the award dated:07.06.2013 passed by the Court of III Addl. Labor Court, Bengaluru, in I.D.No.84/2009 vide Annexure-V.

3. For convenience's sake, the parties shall be referred to as per their status and ranking and before the Labor court.

4. The petition averments are as follows:

The first party was appointed as an Office Assistant in the year 1985. Subsequently, two charge sheets dated 14.11.2006 and 18.04.2007 were issued against him, alleging acts of misconduct, including misappropriation of employees' salaries and insubordination.

Pursuant to the issuance of the charge sheets, departmental inquiry proceedings were initiated. The Inquiry Officer conducted a detailed inquiry into the allegations contained in both charge sheets. Upon completion of the inquiry, the Inquiry Officer submitted his report holding that the charges contained in the charge sheet dated 14.11.2006 were proved, whereas the charges contained in the charge sheet dated 18.04.2007 were not proved.

Based on the findings of the Inquiry Officer, the respondent was issued a second show-cause notice by the disciplinary authority. The respondent submitted his explanation to the said notice. After considering the inquiry report and the respondent’s reply, the disciplinary authority passed an order dated 09.03.2009 dismissing the respondent from service.

Aggrieved by the order of dismissal, the first party raised an industrial dispute in I.D. No. 84/2009 before the Labor Court at Bengaluru. The Labor Court, after considering the material on record, held that the domestic enquiry conducted by the Management was fair and proper.

However, by its Award dated 07.06.2013, the Labor Court allowed the claim petition in part. The Labor Court set aside the order of dismissal dated 09.03.2009 passed by the disciplinary authority and directed the Management to reinstate the workman to his original post within one month from the date on which the award becomes enforceable. The Labor Court further directed payment of 25% back wages, while imposing a penalty of stoppage of one increment with cumulative effect, and granted continuity of service along with all other consequential benefits.

Being aggrieved by the said Award, the petitioner–

Management has filed the present Writ Petition before this Court, challenging the Award on various grounds as set out in the Memorandum of Writ Petition.

5. Counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions.

Counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the following decisions:

1. MANAGING DIRECTOR, BALASAHEB DESAI SAHAKARI S.K.LIMITED V/S. KASHINATH GANAPATI KAMBALE reported in 2009 2 SCC

288.

2. DELHI HIGH COURT - PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK V/S. SMT.SNEH AGGARWAL reported in

2023 LLR 1108.

3. OM PAL SINGH V/S. DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY AND OTHERS reported in (2020)

3 SCC 103 Coun