- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:319 WP No. 12227 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 12227 OF 2024 (L-TER) BETWEEN: MR. KUMARA NAYAKA S/O KALAIAH NAYAKA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.3, 4TH CROSS, SUVARNANAGAR, NAGASANDRA POST, BANGALORE-560 073. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ROHAN KOTHARI., ADVOCATE SRI. AZHAR ALI FAROOQI., ADVOCATE) AND: DIVISIONAL CONTROLLING OFFICER AND DISCIPLINARY OFFICER, BANGALORE METROPOLITAN TRANSPORT CORPORATION, WEST DIVISION/ZONE, CENTRAL OFFICERS, K.H.ROAD, BANGALORE-560 027. …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. H.R.RENUKA., ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS. THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: Digitally signed by THEJASKUMAR N Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:319 WP No. 12227 of 2024 ORAL ORDER Sri.Rohan Kothari., counsel on behalf of Sri.Azhar Ali Farooqi., for the petitioner and Smt.H.R.Renuka., counsel for the respondent has appeared in person. 2. The captioned Writ Petition is filed seeking following reliefs: 1. Pass necessary writ in the nature of Certiorari setting aside the order dated 31.10.2023 passed by the III Addl. Labour Court, Nyayadegula, Bengaluru to the extent that it didn't grant ad- interim exparte order on I.A.No.1, in favour of the petitioner herein vide Annexure-A. 2. Pass necessary writ in the nature of Certiorari, to stay the operation of the termination order dated 31.08.2023 passed by the Respondent in bearing No. BMTC/KK/PAVA/Discipline/KA-37/275/5490 /23-24 vide Annexure-F. 3. Counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the Writ papers with care. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:319 WP No. 12227 of 2024 4. Suffice it to note that the petitioner filed a claim statement questioning the order of dismissal before the Labour Court, Bengaluru and the same came to be registered in I.D.No.45/2023 and he has filed an interlocutory application seeking stay. The grievance of the petitioner is that the Labor Court is not passing any orders on the interlocutory application. Counsel for the petitioner therefore, submits that an appropriate order may be passed. By way of reply, counsel Smt.H.R.Renuka., submits that the Corporation has filed counter statement and also objections to the interlocutory application. She argued by saying that the first party has filed a memo along with the citations and now the dispute is set down for hearing on interlocutory application on 27.01.2025. Counsel therefore, submits that an appropriate order may be passed. The oral submission made by counsel for the respective parties is placed on record. A perusal of the daily order sheet of the Labor Court reflects that on 31.10.2023, the Labor Court has adjourned the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:319 WP No. 12227 of 2024 matter. Taking note of the fact that the dispute is now set- down for hearing on interlocutory application on 27.01.2025, I find no reasons to quash the order dated 31.10.2023. However, a gentle reminder is made to the Presiding Officer, Labour Court to hear and dispose of the interlocutory application at the earliest. 5. Resultantly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. The parties to the dispute are hereby directed to cooperate with the Presiding Officer, Labor Court. This Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE MRP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24