The Management of Vs the Government of Karnataka — Company and Corporate | Karnataka HC (2026)

The Management of Vs the Government of Karnataka — Company and Corporate | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition allowed; impugned order of reference dated 19.02.2025 set aside; matter remitted to the appropriate Government to pass orders on the reference application, assigning reasons for the earlier refusal and the change of decision, without any further hearing of the parties, based on materials already available, within 30 days; nothing expressed on merits; IA No.1/2026 for vacating stay does not survive for consideration.

Issue for consideration

Whether the order of reference dated 19.02.2025 passed by the appropriate Government without assigning reasons - despite the direction in W.P.No.21953/2023 to assign reasons for changing its earlier decision not to refer - is liable to be set aside.

Court's answer

The appropriate Government is bound to follow the direction issued by this Court (in W.P.No.21953/2023) and must assign reasons as to why its earlier decision declining reference was changed and why the dispute is referred to the Labour Court.

Ratio / Principle

The impugned order of reference dated 19.02.2025 is set aside.

Key takeaways

The matter is remitted to the appropriate Government to pass orders on the application seeking reference, keeping in mind the observations made in the order dated 08.08.2023 (as printed in the operative clause).ratio¶61
While passing fresh orders, the appropriate Government is required to assign reasons why it declined to refer the dispute for adjudication on the earlier occasion and why it changed its decision to refer the dispute.ratio¶62
There cannot be any further hearing of the parties; the parties having already been heard by the appropriate Government, no fresh hearing is required.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Reference of dispute - Duty of appropriate Government to assign reasons - Management of M/s. Yazaki India Pvt. Ltd. challenged the order of reference dated 19.02.2025 (LD 355 IDM 2023) referring its dispute with Karnataka General Labour Union to the Labour Court, Ramanagara. The Government had first declined reference on the premise that the persons raising the dispute were not workmen, and later referred the dispute by order dated 08.08.2023 without any application; that order was set aside by this Court in W.P.No.21953/2023 (order dated 23.08.2024) with a direction to record reasons for differing from the earlier order, particularly absent any fresh application. The fresh reference order again assigned no reasons. Held: the appropriate Government is bound to follow the direction issued by this Court and must assign reasons why the earlier decision not to refer was changed and why the dispute stands referred; the impugned order dated 19.02.2025 is set aside and the matter remitted to pass orders on the reference application based on materials already available, without any further hearing of the parties, within 30 days. Nothing expressed on the merits; IA No.1/2026 (vacating stay) does not survive.

NC: 2026:KHC:21786 WP No. 35499 of 2025

1 -

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 21^ST DAY OF APRIL, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO. 35499 OF 2025 (L-RES)

BETWEEN:

THE MANAGEMENT OF M/S. YAZAKI INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, REGISTERED UNDER THE THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956, SY.NO.79 AND 80, NATIONAL HIGHWAY - 48, KUNIGAL ROAD, LAKKENAHALLI VILLAGE, SOLUR HUBLI, MAGADI TALUK - 562 127. REPRESENTED BY ITS HEAD LEGAL AND COMPANY SECRETARY, MR. OMKAR KALGI.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. PRASHANTH B.K, ADVOCATE)

Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka

AND:

THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR, VIKAS SOUDHA, VIDHANA VEEDHI, BENGALURU -560 001, BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.

KARNATAKA GENERAL LABOUR UNION, NO.16/7, MUNI KADIRAPPA LAYOUT, GRAPHITE INDIA ROAD, HOODY, BENGALURU - 560 048. REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY.

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:21786 WP No. 35499 of 2025

HC-KAR

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.M.RAJAKUMAR, AGA FOR R1; MS.AVANI CHOKESHI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF REFERENCE DATED 19.02.2025 MADE BY THE R-1 IN LD 355 IDM 2023 ANNEXURE - J; GRANT AN INTERIM ORDER TO STAY THE FURTHER PROCEEDINGS IN REF NO. 155/2025 PENDING BEFORE THE LABOUR COURT FOR RAMANAGARA RAMANAGARAM PURSUANT TO THE NOTICE DATED 27.10.2025 ANNEXURE - K.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

ORAL ORDER

This petition is filed assailing the order dated 19.02.2025 passed by respondent No.1. In terms of the said order, the alleged dispute between the petitioner and the respondent No.2 is referred to adjudication.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner -

Management would submit that the petitioner had approached this court on 23.08.2024 challenging the order

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:21786 WP No. 35499 of 2025

HC-KAR

of reference dated 08.08.2023 in W.P.No.21953/2023

marked at Annexure-G.

Learned counsel would submit that, on the first occasion, the appropriate Government declined to refer the dispute under the premise that the persons who raising the alleged dispute are not workmen. Thereafter, it appears that, without there being any application, the dispute is referred to the adjudication in terms of order dated. 8.08.2023, which was the subject matter of challenge in W.P.No.21953/2023.

This Court has allowed W.P.No.21953/2023. Learned counsel for the petitioner would invite attention of this Court to the observations made by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in terms of the order dated 23.08.2024 which would read as under:

"10.xxx In the instant case, nothing is brought on record to show that any such challenge was made to the first order of reference or any application for seeking reference for the second time was made. Even if the second order was in the exercise of administrative power the same should reflect the

4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:21786 WP No. 35499 of 2025

HC-KAR

reasons for differing from the earlier order, particularly, in the absence of any such application."

Having made this observation, the Court also set aside the order dated 08.08.2023 and the matter was remitted to the appropriate Government / first respondent in the said petition to consider the matter and to pass an order keeping in mind the observations made hereinabove.

Learned counsel for the petitioner inviting the attention to the impugned order would submit that the impugned order dated 19.02.2025 referring the dispute does not assign the reasons, though ordered in the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.21953/2023. Thus, it is urged that the petition has to be allowed and the impugned order has to be set aside.

Learned counsel appearing for the respondent

No.2 would submit that the dispute is whether the members of the second respondent-Union for whose benefit the cause is espoused, are workmen or not?

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:21786 WP No. 35499 of 2025

HC-KAR

The said question has to be decided by the Labour Court and that being the position, the reason assigned by the appropriate Government in the impugned order is more than sufficient and there is no need to set aside the order.

The Court has considered the contentions raised

at the Bar and perused the records.

In terms of the impugned order, in page No. 2, after referring to the previous history as well as the order dated 08.08.2023 passed in W.P.No.21953/2023, the appropriate Government has held that the representatives of the petitioner-Management and the respondent No.2Union have stuck to their respective stand, as such, the dispute has to be resolved through adjudication under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

It is relevant to notice that, the order dated 08.08.2023 impugned in W.P.No.21953/2023 has attained finality, wherein this Court has specifically directed the appropriate Government to assign reasons as to why the

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:21786 WP No. 35499 of 2025

HC-KAR

decision taken earlier, not to refer the dispute is changed without there being any application.

This being the position, the Court is of the view that the appropriate Government is bound to follow the direction issued by this Court and has to assign the reason as to why the decision taken earlier by declining to refer the dispute is changed and the why dispute is referred to the Labour Court.

Learned counsel for respondent No.2 at this juncture would submit that the parties have been heard by the appropriate Government and there need not be any further hearing. The said submission appears to be just and proper. Hence, the following:-

ORDER

i) The petition is allowed .

ii) The impugned order dated 19.02.2025 is hereby

set aside.

7 - NC: 2026:KHC:21786 WP No. 35499 of 2025

HC-KAR

iii) The matter is remitted to the appropriate

Government to pass orders on the application seeking reference keeping in mind the observations made in the order dated 08.08.2023.

iv) While passing the order, the appropriate Government is required to assign reasons as to why it declined to refer the dispute for adjudication on earlier occasion, and why it has changed its decision to refer the dispute for adjudication.

v) Nothing is expressed on the merits of the matter.

vi) It is made clear that there cannot be any further hearing of the parties.

vii) The appropriate Government is directed to pass orders based on the materials already available before it. The said exercise shall be completed within 30 days from the date of the receipt of the copy of the order.

NC: 2026:KHC:21786 WP No. 35499 of 2025

8 -

HC-KAR

viii) In view of the disposal of the main matter, the application in IA No.1/2026 for vacating stay does not survive for consideration.

Sd/(ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE

BSV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16