- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:2054 WP No. 8873 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO. 8873 OF 2018 (L-KSRTC) BETWEEN: THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, KSRTC, CHIKKABALLAPURA DIVISION, CHIKKABALLAPURA, HEREIN REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF LAW OFFICER K S R T C, CENTRAL OFFICES, K H ROAD, SHANTHI NAGAR, BANGALORE-560027. …PETITIONER (BY SRI SANJEEV B L, ADVOCATE) AND: SRI A H SEETHAREDDY, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, C/O GENERAL SECRETARY, KSRTC MAZDOOR SANGHA ®, CHIKKABALLAPURA DIVISION, CHIKKABALLAPURA - 562101. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI CHOWDAPPA D N, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE PERTAINING TO I.D. NO.198/2010 WHICH HAS CULMINATED IN ITS AWARD DATED 28.06.2017 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-C AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE Digitally signed by PRAMILA G V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:2054 WP No. 8873 of 2018 ORAL ORDER The petitioner is assailing the award passed by the Industrial Tribunal in I.D. No.198/2010. In terms of award dated 28.06.2017, the Industrial Tribunal has set-aside the order of punishment dated 30.09.2008 postponing two ensuing annual increments of first party workman with cumulative effect and consequently, the petitioner/employer is directed to restore all the increments and to pay arrears of wages with all consequential benefits. Certain admitted facts are as under:- On 28.11.2006, the respondent/employee was discharging his duty as a conductor. The bus en route to Chintamani from Shettihalli, the bus was intercepted at 11:10 a.m. and it was found that there were 34+1+0 passengers travelling in the bus and three passengers were found without tickets. It is alleged that three passengers boarded at Shettihalli and were bound to Chintamani and conductor had - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:2054 WP No. 8873 of 2018 not collected Rs.10/- towards fare from each of the said passengers. Based on these allegations, the domestic enquiry was held. The Disciplinary Authority accepting the finding of the enquiry officer held that conductor is guilty and imposed a penalty by deferring two annual increments with cumulative effect. The respondent/employee raised Industrial Dispute. The parties led evidence before the Tribunal and the Tribunal held that charges are not proved. Hence, the employer is before this Court. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would contend that the Tribunal committed an error in setting aside the order of punishment. It is his contention that evidence is not properly appreciated. The interception is not in dispute and the fact that three persons were without ticket is also established from the defence of the employee/conductor. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:2054 WP No. 8873 of 2018 Thus, he would contend that the impugned award is to be set-aside and the punishment has to be restored. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/employee would contend that the interception took place at Kotagal which is just 1.5 k.m before Narasapura. Three passengers had boarded the bus at Narasapura when the conductor was issuing tickets to the passengers who boarded the bus at Narasapura, two officials intercepted and made a false allegation that tickets were not issued to the passengers. 3. Learned counsel would refer to the evidence of one of the officials examined on behalf of the management. In the cross examination, it is admitted by MW-1 that the Conductor was in the process of issuing ticket to the passengers. Though it is contended that even if the passengers had boarded at Narasapura before reaching Kotagal, where interception took place, the - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:2054 WP No. 8873 of 2018 conductor ought to have issued tickets to three passengers. 4. What is relevant to note is the distance between Narasapura and Kotagal is just 1.5 k.m. It is quite possible that bus might have reached Kotagal from Narasapura within five minutes because of the short distance. Under these circumstances, the Tribunal has held that the charges are not proved. 5. This Court has considered the reasons assigned by the Industrial Tribunal and also the evidence on record. From the evidence on record, it is noticed that witness examined on behalf of the management himself has stated that the conductor was in the process of issuing tickets. The distance between Kotagal and Narasapura is 1.5 k.m. 6. It is quite possible that bus might have reached Kotagal from Narasapura within five minutes. This being the position, the view taken by the Tribunal cannot be said to be an erroneous or perverse contrary to the evidence - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:2054 WP No. 8873 of 2018 on record so as to interfere in the jurisdiction under Article 227 of Constitution of India. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. The order of the Industrial Tribunal is confirmed. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE GVP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 37