- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5804 WP No. 104335 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 104335 OF 2023 (L-KSRTC) BETWEEN: THE MANAGEMENT N.W.K.R.T.C., REPRESENTED BY ITS DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, SIRSI DIVISION, SIRSI, IS REPT BY THE CHIEF LAW OFFICER, NWKRTC, CENTRAL OFFICE, HUBBALLI-580 020. … PETITIONER (BY SMT. VEENA HEGDE., ADVOCATE) AND: SRI. G.N.NAIK, AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: CONDUCTOR, R/O: AT POST: MANDANGERI, TQ: ANKOLA, DIST: UTTAR KANNADA-581 344. … RESPONDENT (SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS. THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5804 WP No. 104335 of 2023 ORAL ORDER Smt.Veena Hegde, counsel for the petitioner, has appeared in person. A notice was issued to the respondent. A perusal of the office note depicts that the respondent is served and unrepresented. The respondent has neither engaged the services of an advocate nor conducted the case as a party in person. 2. The brief facts are these: The respondent, G.N. Naik, was a Conductor in the establishment of the Corporation. He was issued with an Article of Charge alleging that the respondent had pilfered the Corporation's revenue. The inquiry officer submitted the findings holding that the charges are proved. The Disciplinary Authority imposed an order of minor punishment on 12.05.2003. The workman raised a dispute before the Industrial Tribunal, Hubballi, in I.D.No.137/2016. The Tribunal held that the domestic enquiry conducted by the Corporation was not fair and proper. The Tribunal, vide the order dated 04.06.2022, set aside the order of punishment. This Award is - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5804 WP No. 104335 of 2023 called into question in this Writ Petition on several grounds as set out in the Memorandum of Writ Petition. 3. Counsel for the petitioner has urged several contentions and perused the Writ papers with utmost care. 4. The simple point that arises for consideration is whether the award of the Tribunal requires interference. 5. Suffice it to note that the respondent was visited with an order of minor punishment in 2003. Strangely, he raised a dispute in the year 2016. There is an inordinate delay of almost thirteen years. The Tribunal erroneously condoned the delay. In my view, the Tribunal could not have condoned the delay of thirteen years and entertained the reference. The reason is apparent. The Hon'ble Apex Court reported in PRABHAKAR VS. JOINT DIRECTOR, SERICULTURE DEPARTMENT AND ANOTHER reported in (2015) 15 SCC 1 has held that when there is no agitation by the workman against the order of punishment and the dispute is raised belatedly and the delay and laches remained unexplained, it should be presumed that he had waived his right. It is also observed that at the time when the dispute was raised, it had - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5804 WP No. 104335 of 2023 become stale and was not an existing dispute. Even in the present case, when the dispute was raised by the workman, it had virtually become a stale dispute. The Tribunal has overlooked the aspect of delay and laches. Moreover, setting aside the order of minor penalty is without jurisdiction in as much as the Tribunal has no power to set aside the minor penalty. The Tribunal could not have been pressed into service the aspect of minor penalty. The Managerial decision to impose a minor penalty is absolute, and the same cannot be modified by the Tribunal unless there is a perversity and victimization. In the present case, there is no perversity and victimization. Hence, setting aside the order of minor punishment is unsustainable in law. For the reasons stated above, the award of the Tribunal is liable to be set aside, and so, it is set aside. 6. The Writ of Certiorari is ordered. The Order dated 04.06.2022 passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Hubballi, in I.D.No.137/2016 vide Annexure-D is quashed. The order of minor punishment dated 12.05.2003 is confirmed. 7. Resultantly, the Writ Petition is allowed. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5804 WP No. 104335 of 2023 Because of the disposal of the Writ Petition, all pending interlocutory applications, if any, are disposed of, and the interim order, if any, granted by this Court stands discharged. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE MRP, CLK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 69