Mariswamy Gowda B G., Vs the Divisional Controller — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

Mariswamy Gowda B G., Vs the Divisional Controller — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:8267 WP No. 16308 of 2024

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

WRIT PETITION NO. 16308 OF 2024 (L-KSRTC)

BETWEEN:

MARISWAMY GOWDA B G., S/O B T GIRIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/AT PARVATHAPPA LAYOUT, SONDEKOPPA CIRCLE, NELAMANGALA TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562123.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI L SHEKAR, ADVOCATE) AND:

THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, KSRTC, TUMKUR DIVISION, TUMKUR - 572201.

Digitally signed by PRAMILA G V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

…RESPONDENT

(BY SRI B L SANJEEV, ADVOCATE)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD 30.01.2023 AS CONTAINED UNDER ANNEXURE-A AND ALSO THE AWARD DTD 07.09.2023 AS CONTAINED UNDER ANNEXURE-B PASSED BY THE LEARNED PRESIDING OFFICER, INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL IN I.D.NO.234/2014 AND ETC.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:8267 WP No. 16308 of 2024

HC-KAR

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

ORAL ORDER

This petition is filed by the employee-Conductor of Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) assailing the Award dated 07.09.2023 in I.D.No.234/2014 on the file of Industrial Tribunal, Bangalore dismissing his claim.

The petitioner-employee raised a dispute

challenging the penalty pursuant to domestic enquiry, wherein it is found that the petitioner is guilty of charges of not issuing tickets worth Rs.52/-, though he collected the amount from the passengers. The petitioner admitted his charge before the Enquiry Officer and Disciplinary Authority imposed a penalty of withholding one yearly increment with cumulative effect.

The Industrial Tribunal held that the enquiry was fair and proper and on the contentions relating to victimization, after considering the evidence placed before it, namely the records pertaining to the disciplinary enquiry has concluded that the charge against the petitioner-employee is established

3 -

NC: 2026:KHC:8267 WP No. 16308 of 2024

HC-KAR

and the penalty of withholding one increment with cumulative effect is just and fair.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioneremployee would contend that the penalty imposed withholding increment with cumulative effect is disproportionate to the charge proved against the petitioner. It is his contention that the petitioner has fairly admitted the charge, as such the respondent- Corporation should have shown leniency in favour of the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the respondent-Corporation would submit that the charge admitted by the petitioner is grave and that itself is sufficient to impose penalty of dismissal. However, the respondent-Corporation has been lenient in favour of the petitioner and has only withheld one increment with cumulative effect and this penalty cannot be said to be disproportionate to the misconduct alleged. Thus, he would urge that the petition be dismissed.

The Court has considered the contentions raised at

the Bar and perused the records.

4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:8267 WP No. 16308 of 2024

HC-KAR

As can be seen from the impugned award, the petitioner has not produced any documentary evidence before the Industrial Tribunal. He has led his evidence to support his contention that it is a case of victimisation. The respondentCorporation has produced all the records relating to the domestic enquiry.

After going through the records, the Tribunal has come to the conclusion that the petitioner has admitted the charge levelled against him and the charge is that he did not issue tickets after having collected Rs.52/from the passengers. He has collected Rs.52/- from 4 passengers for each ticket worth for Rs.13/-.

The Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation Servants (Conduct and Discipline) Regulations, 1971 provide for penalty of dismissal in case of such misconduct as it is a grave misconduct under the Regulations. However, the penalty of dismissal is not imposed. The respondent-Corporation has shown leniency and has imposed a penalty of withholding one increment with cumulative effect.

5 -

NC: 2026:KHC:8267 WP No. 16308 of 2024

HC-KAR

Learned counsel for the respondent - Corporation has also submitted that subsequent to the aforementioned misconduct which is very much admitted and established, the petitioner has again misconducted himself on 14 occasions and penalty has been imposed. The statement is not disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

In the aforementioned facts of the case, the Court

is of the view that no case is made out to interfere with the

award passed by the Industrial Tribunal.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed .

Sd/-

(ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE

GVP

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 40