- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:4057 WP No. 25415 of 2024 C/W WP No. 63 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO. 25415 OF 2024 (L-KSRTC) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 63 OF 2024 (L-KSRTC) IN WP NO. 25415/2024 BETWEEN: ANANDA KUMAR S.T. S/O TIRUMALAPPA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/AT SOMENAHALLI VILLAGE, GUDIBANDE TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-562104 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHEKAR L, ADVOCATE) AND: THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER K.S.R.T.C. CHIKKAMAGALURU DIVISION, CHIKKAMAGALURU-577101 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI.B.L.SANJEEV, ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED AWARD DTD 26.08.2021 AS CONTAINED UNDER ANNEXURE-A PASSED BY THE LEARNED PRL. DISTRICT JUDGE, CHIKKABALLAPURA IN ID NO. 15/2018 TO THE EXTENT OF Digitally signed by REKHA R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:4057 WP No. 25415 of 2024 C/W WP No. 63 of 2024 WITHHOLDING THREE ENSUING ANNUAL INCREMENTS WITH CUMULATIVE EFFECT IS CONCERNED AND ETC., IN WP NO. 63/2024 BETWEEN: THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER KARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION (KSRTC), CHIKKABALLAPURA DIVISION, CHIKKABALLAPURA HEREIN REP BY THE CHIEF LAW OFFICER, KSRTC CENTRAL OFFICES, K H ROAD, SHANTHI NAGAR, BANGALORE-560001 ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. SANJEEV B L, ADVOCATE) AND: SRI. S T ANANDA KUMAR S/O SRI THIRUMALAPPA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/O SOMENAHALLI, GUDIBANDE TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-562104 ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI. SHEKAR L, ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE AWARD DTD 26.08.2021 PASSED BY THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT CHIKKABALLAPURA IN ID REF.NO.15/2018 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-D. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:4057 WP No. 25415 of 2024 C/W WP No. 63 of 2024 THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR REPORTING SETTLEMENT, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE ORAL ORDER Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner/Corporation and the learned counsel for the respondent jointly submit that the dispute is amicably settled between the parties and the parties have voluntarily entered into settlement and the terms of the settlement are recorded in the joint memo filed today. 3. The petitioner has questioned the award passed by the Labour Court. The particulars of the Labour Court, date of award and reference number are mentioned in the joint memo which is filed today. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent submit that they have necessary instructions - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:4057 WP No. 25415 of 2024 C/W WP No. 63 of 2024 to sign the joint memo on behalf of the parties in the proceedings. The same is signed by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent. 5. The joint memo filed today is placed on record and the same reads as follows: "The WP filed against the award in ID/Ref.No.15/2018 dated 26.08.2021 on the file of the Principal District & Sessions Judge, Chikkaballapura has been settled between the parties on the following terms and the award may kindly be modified as under: 1. The Corporation has agreed to take the Respondent into service as a fresh trainee from the date of reporting/working pursuant to the interim order passed in the above writ petition, training will for 1 year. 2. The Respondent to be placed on probation for a period of 2 years on completion of 1 year of training. 3. The period of service rendered by the employee/trainee prior to the order of removal would not be considered for any purpose. 4. The Respondent is not entitled for difference of wages from the date of probation till the date of settlement, however they are entitled to get notional pay fixation from the date on which they are brought on probation. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:4057 WP No. 25415 of 2024 C/W WP No. 63 of 2024 5. The settlement is arrived without prejudice to the contentions taken by the corporation that the trainee is not a workman under the provisions of I D Act and the said issue is kept open to be decided in appropriate cases. The parties to the proceedings have agreed for the above terms." 6. This Court has gone through the terms and conditions of the joint memo. This Court does not find any impediment to accept the terms and conditions. Accordingly, the joint memo is accepted. 7. Accordingly, the impugned order is modified in terms of the joint memo. 8. The writ petitions are disposed of in terms of the joint memo. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE ASN List No.: 2 Sl No.: 16