IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B. M. SHYAM PRASAD

WRIT PETITION NO.3670/2016 (L-KSRTC)

BETWEEN :

SRI. P. KRISHNA KUMAR

S/O. LATE S.A. PILLAIAH,

SINCE DEAD BY HIS WIFE AND

LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE,

SMT. G. KALPANA,

W/O. LATE P. KRISHNA KUMAR,

AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,

RESIDING AT NO.58, "KEERTHI SHREE",

SREE YELLAMMA TEMPLE ROAD,

B.S.K. 3^RD STAGE, VIVEKANANDANAGAR,

BENGALURU - 560 085.

... PETITIONER

(By SRI. SRINIVASA K., ADVOCATE)

AND :

THE KARNATAKA STATE ROAD

TRANSPORT CORPORATION

REPRESENTED BY THE

DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER,

MYSORE RURAL DIVISION,

MYSORE - 01.

... RESPONDENT

(By SMT. H. R. RENUKA., ADVOCATE)

2

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND

227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE

IMPUGNED AWARD PASSED BY THE PRESIDING OFFICER,

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL MYSORE IN REF. NO. 273/2010 DATED

03.06.2015, AS PER ANNEXURE-G TO THE WRIT PETITION AND

CONSEQUENTLY

REMAND

THE

MATTER

BACK

TO

THE

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, MYSORE FOR ADJUDICATION OF

DISPUTE ON MERITS.

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY

HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE

FOLLOWING:

O R D E R

This writ petition is filed by the wife of a deceased

workman who is removed from service as a Conductor by the

respondent vide its dismissal order dated 17.03.2003. This

dismissal order dated 17.03.2003 is preceded by an enquiry,

the enquiry report and the acceptance thereof by the

concerned. Thereafter, the deceased workman has raised a

dispute which is referred under Section 10[1][d] of the

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 [for short ‘ID Act’] by the

Government of Karnataka by its order dated 26.11.2010, and

the reference is rejected by the Industrial Tribunal, Mysuru

3

[for short ‘the Tribunal’] by its impugned order dated

03.06.2015.

2.

The workman was issued with article of charges

dated 27.08.1997 with the allegation that on 18.08.1997

when the bus bearing No.CAF-537 on Route No.252/3 was

checked at Bengaluru Bus Stand, a third person, who was

officiating as the conductor thrust the custody of the Way bill,

ticket book, old tickets and cash bag into the hands of the

inspecting official and ran off the bus, and on verification it

was found that the workman had allowed a third person to

officiate as the Conductor. It was also alleged that this third

person had sold old and reissued tickets and there was

excess cash of Rs.134/- in the cash bag. The enquiry

continued with the workman filing his reply. The Enquiry

Officer was changed twice midway during the enquiry, and

ultimately enquiry report was submitted resulting in the

workman’s dismissal from service treating the suspension

4

period as ‘Not on Duty’. The workman preferred an appeal

before the Appellate Authority on 29.04.2003 and the appeal

was dismissed on 29.07.2003. The workman after a lapse of

6 [six] years approached the Government for a reference

under Section 10 of the ID Act and the following points were

referred:

“1.

DqÀ½vÀªÀUÀðzÀªÀgÁzÀ

«¨sÁVÃAiÀÄ

¤AiÀÄAvÀæuÁ¢üPÁjUÀ¼ÀÄ, PÉ.J¸ï.Dgï.n.¹., ªÉÄʸÀÆgÀÄ

UÁæªÀiÁAvÀgÀ

«¨sÁUÀ,

ªÉÄʸÀÆgÀÄ-1,

EªÀgÀÄ

PÁ«ÄðPÀgÁzÀ ²æÃ. PÀȵÀÚPÀĪÀiÁgï, ¤ªÁðºÀPÀ, 49

ªÀµÀð, EªÀjUÉ ¢£ÁAPÀ : 17.03.2003 gÀAzÀÄ ²PÉë

«¢ü¹

ºÉÆgÀr¹gÀĪÀ

DzÉñÀªÀ£ÀÄß

¥Àæ²ß¹

CfðzÁgÀgÀÄ ¸ÀĪÀiÁgÀÄ 06 ªÀµÀðUÀ¼À «¼ÀA§PÉÌ

PÁgÀt

¤ÃqÀzÉ

F

«ªÁzÀ

JwÛgÀĪÀÅzÀÄ

£ÁåAiÀĸÀªÀÄävÀªÉÃ?

2. ºÁVzÀÝ°è,

«¨sÁVÃAiÀÄ

¤AiÀÄAvÀæuÁ¢üPÁjUÀ¼ÀÄ,

PÉ.J¸ï.Dgï.n.¹., ªÉÄʸÀÆgÀÄ UÁæªÀiÁAvÀgÀ «¨sÁUÀ,

ªÉÄʸÀÆgÀÄ-1,

EªÀgÀÄ

PÁ«ÄðPÀgÁzÀ

²æÃ.

PÀȵÀÚPÀĪÀiÁgï, ¤ªÁðºÀPÀ, 49 ªÀµÀð, £ÀA. 58,

QÃwð²æÃ, ²æà gÉÃtÄPÀAiÀÄ®èªÀÄä mÉA¥À¯ï gÉÆÃqï,

©.J¸ï.PÉ

3£ÉÃ

ºÀAvÀ,

«ªÉÃPÁ£ÀAzÀ£ÀUÀgÀ,

¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ-560085,

EªÀjUÉ

DzÉñÀ

¸ÀASÉå:

PÀgÁ¸À/ ªÉÄÊ«UÁæ/ ²¥Á/3751/7172/2002-03, ¢£ÁAPÀ :

5

17.03.2003gÀ

DzÉñÀzÀ£ÀéAiÀÄ

¸ÉêɬÄAzÀ

ªÀeÁ

ªÀiÁrgÀĪÀÅzÀÄ £ÁåAiÀÄ