Dismissed¶49

Mukunda H R v. the Divisional Controller Bmtc

Karnataka HC12 Jan 2026WA/1674/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Karnataka, WA No. 1674 of 2024 (L-KSRTC), decided 12-01-2026, coram D K Singh & S Rachaiah (judgment per D K Singh). Workman's writ appeal under S.4 Karnataka High Court Act against Single Judge judgment upholding dismissal for two-year unauthorized absence (16.06.2011–20.06.2013) and reversing Labour Court reinstatement award (Ref No. 39/2015, dt. 02.03.2017). 300-day delay condoned (S.5 Limitation Act); abandonment proved in domestic inquiry; no error found; appeal dismissed on merits.

What did the court decide?

No relief granted to the appellant; appeal dismissed on merits; pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. ¶49

Mukunda H R Vs the Divisional Controller Bmtc — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

1 - NC: 2026:KHC:1714-DB WA No. 1674 of 2024

¶2

HC-KAR

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH WRIT APPEAL NO. 1674 OF 2024 (L-KSRTC)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

MUKUNDA H R

S/O V. RAMAIAH

AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS

R/AT INDIRANAGARA

HULIYAR TOWN,

CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI TALUK

¶14

TUMKUR DISTRICT – 572 218.

¶15

…APPELLANT

¶16

Digitally signed by SREEDHARAN BANGALORE SUSHMA LAKSHMI Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶17

(BY SRI. M C BASAVARAJU, ADVOCATE)

¶18

AND:

¶19

THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER

¶20

BMTC

¶21

WEST DIVISION, KENGERI, BENGLAURU NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER BMTC,

¶22

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:1714-DB WA No. 1674 of 2024

¶23

HC-KAR

¶24

CENTRAL OFFICE, K.H. ROAD BENGALURU - 560 027.

¶25

…RESPONDENT

¶26

(BY SRI. H R RENUKA, ADVOCATE)

¶27

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE PASSED IN WP No. 49303/2017 DATED 05.12.2023 OR GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEF OR RELIEFS AS THIS HON’BLE COURT MAY DEEM FIT TO GRANT UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶28

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

¶29

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH

¶30

and

¶31

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

¶32

¶33

NC: 2026:KHC:1714-DB WA No. 1674 of 2024

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶36

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH)

¶37

The present appeal has been filed by the appellant/workman impugning the Judgment and Order dated 05.12.2023, passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. No. 49303/2017, which was instituted by the respondent - the Karanataka State Road Transport Corporation (hereafter referred to as 'KSRTC').

¶38

The parties are referred to as per their ranking in the writ petition for the sake of convenience.

¶39

The respondent was appointed as a driver in the KSRTC. He remained absent unauthorisedly from duty for more than two years i.e., from 16.06.2011 till 20.06.2013. The Assistant Transport Inspector, taking note of the unauthorized absence of the respondent, submitted a report to the Depot Manager on 26.07.2011. The respondent was issued a notice calling upon him to report for duty, however, despite the issuance of the notice, he failed to report. The Depot Manager submitted a detailed

¶40

¶41

NC: 2026:KHC:1714-DB WA No. 1674 of 2024

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

report regarding the respondent’s unauthorized absence to the superior officers in the Corporation.

¶44

Based on the report of Depot Manager, articles of charge along with the imputation were issued to the respondent. The Disciplinary Authority appointed an inquiry officer. The inquiry officer submitted a report finding the charges proved against the respondent. The Disciplinary Authority issued a second show cause notice, after receipt of the inquiry report. Having considered the inquiry report and response of the delinquent employee, an order dated 20.06.2013 came to be passed dismissing the respondent from service.

¶45

The respondent had raised the industrial dispute against this dismissal before the Labour Court in Ref No. 39/2015. The Labour Court, vide award dated 02.03.2017, set aside the order of dismissal and directed the Corporation to reinstate the respondent without backwages, however, with the benefits of continuity of service.

¶46

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:1714-DB WA No. 1674 of 2024

¶47

HC-KAR

¶48

Being aggrieved by the said award passed by the Labour Court dated 02.03.2017, the petitioner - Corporation filed the writ petition. The learned Single Judge, after examining the award of the Labour Court and the statement of the witnesses, set aside the Labour Court's Award and allowed the writ petition.

¶49

The present appeal has been filed with a delay of 300 days. Having considered the explanation in the affidavit filed in support of the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, we condone the delay. However, on merits, we do not find any error in the impugned Judgment and Order. The respondent-workman had abandoned his service. This charge was proved in the domestic inquiry. An employee cannot take his employment for granted. As there was no sufficient explanation provided by the respondent for his two-yearlong unauthorized absence, we dismiss this appeal on merits.

¶50

¶51

NC: 2026:KHC:1714-DB WA No. 1674 of 2024

¶52

HC-KAR

¶53