Sri B Shivanna Since Dead by His Lrs Smt Mangala Vs the Senior Divisional Controller

Sri.B.Shivanna - the workman was selected as Conductor in the establishment of the Corporation in 1982. On 07.11.2009, he was discharging his duties in the bus that belonged to the Corporation bearing Registration No.F-7611 that was plying on route No.39. The bus came to be intercepted by the Checking squad and an offence memo was served on the workman on the ground that he had neither issued ticket nor

¶31

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:45973 WP No. 9336 of 2021

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

collected the requisite fare of Rs.8/- each from a group of seven passengers who were traveling from Halaguru to M.G.Doddi. The workman was issued with articles of charge and he did not submit his reply to the same. Inquiry officer was appointed to hold an inquiry. The inquiry officer conducted a detailed inquiry and submitted his findings holding that the charges are proved. The workman was issued with a second show cause notice along with the findings of the inquiry officer. He submitted his reply to the same. The disciplinary authority taking note of the findings of the inquiry officer and also the past conduct of the workman, passed an order of punishment on 24.08.2011 and dismissed him from service.

¶34

Aggrieved by the order of dismissal, the workman raised a dispute before the III Addl. Labor Court, Bengaluru in I.D.No.04/2012. The Labor Court vide order dated 29.12.2012 held that the domestic inquiry conducted by the Corporation was fair and proper. During the pendency of the dispute, the workman died on 13.08.2013 and his legal representatives were brought on record. The Labor Court vide award dated 10.10.2013 set-aside the order of dismissal and ordered that

¶35

4 -

¶36

NC: 2025:KHC:45973 WP No. 9336 of 2021

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

the legal representatives of deceased workman are entitled for full backwages from the date of dismissal till the date of death of B.Shivanna i.e., 24.08.2011 to 13.08.2013 with all other monetary benefits arising out of the death of the workman. As against the award of the Labor Court, the Corporation filed a Writ Petition in No.19048/2014. This Court vide order dated 08.03.2018 remanded the matter directing the Labor Court to give finding on Issue No.3 in accordance with the law.

¶39

After the remand, the Labor Court vide award dated 05.05.2018 dismissed the claim petition. The Legal representatives of the deceased workman has assailed the award of the Labor Court in this Writ Petition on several grounds as set-out in the Memorandum of Writ Petition.

¶40

Counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the writ papers with care.

¶41

The point that requires consideration is whether the award of the Labor Court requires interference.

¶42

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:45973 WP No. 9336 of 2021

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

The facts are sufficiently said and do not require reiteration. Suffice it to note that the delinquent came under a disciplinary inquiry proceedings and was visited with an order of punishment i.e., dismissed from service. Suffice it to note that while remanding the matter had specifically directed the Labor Court to pass appropriate orders on Issue No.3 in accordance with law and the parties were also directed to appear before the Labor Court on 02^nd April 2018, without waiting for any notice.

¶45

The Labor Court had framed as many as seven issues and Issue No.3 relates to perversity in the order of dismissal. It is significant to note that after remand, despite sufficient adjournments, the legal representatives of deceased workman did not chose to lead any evidence on Issue No.3, hence the same was taken as Nil. The Labor Court extenso referred to the material evidence on record and rightly dismissed the claim petition. I find no grounds to interfere with the award of the Labor Court. The Writ Petition is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed.

¶46