- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:9172-DB WA No. 1040 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K WRIT APPEAL NO. 1040 OF 2021 (S-KSRTC) BETWEEN: THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER KSRTC, BENGALURU CENTRAL DIVISION K.H. ROAD, BENGALURU HEREIN REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF LAW OFFICER KSRTC, CENTRAL OFFICES KH ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR BENGALURU-560 027 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SANJEEV B.L., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. K.N. KRISHNAMURTHY S/O SRI. NANJUNDAPPA AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS REP BY THE GENERAL SECRETARY KSRTC AND BMTC UNITED EMPLOYEES UNION No.23, 4TH MAIN ROAD MATHIKERE EXTENSION BENGALURU-560 054 SINCE DEAD, REP. BY HIS LR'S 1(a). SMT. T.S. RUKMANI W/O LATE K.N. KRISHNAMURTHY AGE 67 YEARS R/O. 26/12, S.N. LINE Digitally signed by CHANNEGOWDA PREMA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:9172-DB WA No. 1040 of 2021 CHIKKAMAVALLI BENGALURU-560 004 1(b). SRI. B.K. NAGESH S/O LATE K.N. KRISHNAMURTHY AGE 44 YEARS R/O. 26/12, S.N. LINE CHIKKAMAVALLI BENGALURU-560 004 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHEKAR L., ADVOCATE FOR R1(a) & R1(b)) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED IN THE WRIT PETITION No.8500/2021 (S-KSRTC) DATED 09.06.2021 AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE SAID WRIT PETITION AS PRAYED FOR, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN) This appeal is preferred against the order of the learned Single Judge, wherein the Labour Court award by which, the penalty of reduction in pay by 2 stages with cumulative effect inflicted on the original respondent was upheld. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:9172-DB WA No. 1040 of 2021 2. The learned Single Judge has considered the contentions in the writ petition and has found that though the Labour Court had found that the enquiry was just and proper, the charges alleged against the workman had not been proved in the enquiry. It was found that no eye witnesses were examined. The driver of the bus, which was subjected for checking was also not examined. It was therefore found that the finding of the Enquiry Officer that charges are proved was totally perverse. It was in those circumstances, the Labour Court had found that infliction of penalty was not proper. The Labour Court in its award has directed as under; "The claim statement filed by the first party is allowed. No costs. Reference Point No.1 is answered in 'Negative' holding that the second party is not justified in imposing the punishment on its workman Sri.K.N.Krishnamurthy, Conductor reducing the basic pay by two incremental stages with cumulative effect and treating the suspension period as not on duty vide its order No.KST/BCD/DIS/3/311/1061/11-12 dated 11.04.2011. Hence, it is set aside. The workman is entitled for the reliefs arising out of setting aside the punishment order dated 11.04.2011. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:9172-DB WA No. 1040 of 2021 Send Copy of this Award to Government for publication. The Government is directed to publish the award in such manner as it thinks fit within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of he same. The award shall become enforceable on the expiry of 30 days from the date of its publication under Section 17 of the I.D.Act 1947. The Government is directed to intimate the publication of award to all the parties to the case by registered post acknowledgement due, without fail." 3. The learned Single Judge having considered the contentions advanced found that the charges alleged were vague and not supported by any corroborative evidence before the Enquiry Officer or before the Tribunal. Therefore, the finding of fact by the Labour Court was found not to require interference. Having considered the contentions advanced and perused the materials on record, we are of the opinion that since the Labour Court as well as the learned Single judge have considered all the relevant factual aspects and have come to the conclusion that the charges as against the workman have not been proved in the enquiry, there is no call for an interference - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:9172-DB WA No. 1040 of 2021 in this intra Court appeal on the said concluded factual findings. We find no merit in the appeal. 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the respondents that the respondent- workman has passed away and that the family is in dire need of funds. 5. The appeal fails. Accordingly, same is dismissed. There will be a direction that the amounts due to the workman on account of the award of the Labour Court shall be paid to his family within two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, if not already paid. All pending IA's stand disposed of. Sd/- (ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE Sd/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE PN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3