Dismissed

Sri S N Ashwathanarayana v. the Divisional Controller

Karnataka HC10 Jul 2024WP/43202/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court, Karnataka, in this writ petition filed by a K.S.R.T.C. Conductor, rejected the challenge to the Industrial Tribunal's award dismissing his industrial dispute due to an eight-year delay. The court found the Tribunal's reasoning on condonation of delay and misconduct just, declining to interfere and dismissing the petition.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is dismissed as it is devoid of merits and the Tribunal's award requires no interference.

Sri S N Ashwathanarayana Vs the Divisional… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

NC: 2024:KHC:26536 WP No. 43202 of 2015

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF JULY, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 43202 OF 2015 (L-KSRTC)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRI. S.N.ASHWATHANARAYANA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, S/O T.NANJUNDAPPA, CONDUCTOR, BADGE NO.1358, CHIKBALLAPUR DEPOT, K.S.R.T.C., CHIKBALLAPUR DIVISION-562 101.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. NAVEEN KUMAR., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. S.B.MUKKANNAPPA., ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, K.S.R.T.C., KOLAR DIVISION, KOLAR, (CHIKBALLAPUR NOW ATTACHED TO KSRTC, Digitally signed by THEJASKUMAR N CHIKKBALLAPUR DIVISION, Location: High CHIKBALLAPUR)-562 101. Court of Karnataka …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. H.R.RENUKA., ADVOCATE)

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS.

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

¶17

NC: 2024:KHC:26536 WP No. 43202 of 2015

¶18

ORDER

¶19

Sri.Naveen Kumar., learned counsel on behalf of

¶20

Sri.S.B.Mukkannappa., for the petitioner and Smt.H.R.Renuka., learned counsel for the respondent have appeared in person.

¶21

2. The short facts are these:

¶22

The petitioner - S.N.Ashwathanarayana was appointed as a Conductor in the establishment of the Corporation. He came under a disciplinary inquiry proceedings for an act of misconduct and was visited with an order of punishment on 30.04.2001 under which his pay was brought to the minimum basic permanently and suspension period as not spent on duty. The petitioner raised an Industrial Dispute and the same came to be referred to Industrial Tribunal, Bengaluru in I.D.No.224/2009 for adjudication. The Tribunal held that the domestic inquiry conducted by the Corporation was fair and proper. The Tribunal vide award dated:21.05.2013 held that there was a delay in raising the dispute and hence, no industrial dispute existed. It is this award that is called into question in this Writ Petition on several grounds as set-out in the Memorandum of Writ Petition.

¶23

¶24

NC: 2024:KHC:26536 WP No. 43202 of 2015

¶25

Learned counsel for the respective parties have urged several contentions. Heard, the contentions urged on behalf of the respective parties and perused the Writ papers and also the records with utmost care.

¶26

The simple point that requires consideration is whether the award of the Tribunal requires interference.

¶27

Suffice it to note that the petitioner came under a disciplinary inquiry proceedings for an act of misconduct and was visited with an order of minor punishment on 30.04.2001. Strangely, he raised a dispute in the year 2009. There is an inordinate delay of almost eight years. The reasoning of the Industrial Tribunal regarding the condonation of delay is just and proper. Furthermore, the Tribunal extenso referred to the material on record and rightly held that the workman was guilty of misconduct. Taking note of the misconduct, the punishment order was made. In my view, the Corporation is justified in its action. Hence, I decline to interfere with the award passed by the Industrial Tribunal. The Writ Petition is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed.

¶28

¶29

NC: 2024:KHC:26536 WP No. 43202 of 2015

¶30

Resultantly, the Writ Petition is dismissed.

¶31

Sd/JUDGE

¶32

TKN

¶33

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 45

Sri S N Ashwathanarayana v. the Divisional Controller

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri S N Ashwathanarayana v. the Divisional Controller

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation Vs Meer Sajjad Hussain

Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation Vs the Assistatnt Labour

The Chief Traffic Manager Vs Sri. Rangaswamaiah

Sri P Venkatesh Vs the Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central)

Ganapathi G R Vs the Divisional Controller

Sri P.R. Shiva Reddy Vs the Divisional Controller