- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5794-DB WA No. 100579 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S G PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA WRIT APPEAL NO.100579 OF 2023 (L-KSRTC) BETWEEN: 1. THE MANAGEMENT OF NWKSRTC, HUBLI DIVISION, HUBLI. 2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, NWKRTC HUBLI, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER, TALUK. HUBLI, DIST. DHARWAD. …APPELLANTS (BY SMT. VEENA HEGDE, ADVOCATE) AND: SHRI SHIVANNA S/O. BASAPPA MENASHINDI, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, OCC. NIL, R/O. GAMANGATTI, TQ. HUBALI, DIST. DHARWAD-580001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI CHETAN T.LIMBIKAI, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO, SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 30/11/2022 PASSED BY THE SINGLE JUDGE IN W.P.NO.67148/2010 AND DISMISS THE WRIT PETITION WITH COST IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS WRIT APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S G PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA Digitally signed by V N BADIGER Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5794-DB WA No. 100579 of 2023 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA) The present writ appeal is filed under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961, calling in question the order dated 30.11.2022, passed in W.P No.67148/2010, whereunder, the 1st respondent/writ petitioner had challenged the award dated 07.06.2010, passed by the Principal Labour Court, Hubli1 in KID.No.10/2006. The learned Single Judge, vide the said order dated 30.11.2022, has held that the 1st respondent/writ petitioner is entitled to subsistence allowance as prescribed under Section 10-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 19472, from the date of acquittal i.e., 24.03.2004 till passing of the impugned award by the Labour Court. 2. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of the Management of Bharat Fritz Werner Ltd., Bangalore Vs. Bharat Fritz Werner Karmika Sangha, Bangalore3, has held that no appeal is maintainable against the order passed by learned Single Judge, wherein, an award passed by the Labour Court was called in question. 1 Hereinafter referred to as the ‘Labour Court’ 2 Hereinafter referred to as the ‘I.D. Act’ 3 2022 (3) AKR 609 - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5794-DB WA No. 100579 of 2023 3. The view rendered in the case of Management of Bharat Fritz Werner Ltd3, has also been followed by an another Co-ordinate Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Sri. C.C. Subbegowda and Another Vs. Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation, Hassan Division, Hassan4. 4. In view of the aforementioned, the above writ appeal is dismissed as not maintainable. 5. In view of disposal of writ appeal, pending I.A’s, if any, does not survive for consideration and are accordingly disposed of. Sd/- (S G PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE PMP LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 10 4 W.A No.1615/2023 dated 19.03.2024