- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5656 WP No. 66797 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 66797 OF 2011 (L-KSRTC) BETWEEN: BASAVANT S/O SABANNA KOTEKAR, AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: NIL, R/O: DESAI ONI, HUBLI. … PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAVI HEGDE, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, N W K R T C, GADAG DIVISION, GADAG. 2. THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, N W K R T C, UTTAR KANNADA DIVISION, SIRSI. … RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SUNITHA P. KALASOOR, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS. THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5656 WP No. 66797 of 2011 ORAL ORDER Sri.Ravi Hegde., counsel for the petitioner and Smt.Sunitha P.Kalasoor., counsel for the respondents have appeared in person. 2. The brief facts are these: The petitioner was appointed as a Conductor in the establishment of the Corporation in 1972. He was dismissed from service on 13.11.1987. He raised a dispute in I.D.No.31/1991. The Tribunal vide award dated 09.10.1997 passed award in favor of the petitioner with full backwages, reinstatement and other benefits. The Corporation assailed the award before this Court in W.P.No.33991/1998 connected with W.P.No.36533/1998. The writ petition was dismissed on 24.09.2001. The Corporation filed the Writ Appeal in No.6992/2001, and the Division Bench vide order dated 24.05.2005 modified the award passed by the Tribunal and directed the Corporation to pay 25% backwages from 01.03.1990 till the date of reinstatement. Thereafter, the petitioner moved an application under Section 33(C)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Labor Court vide order dated - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5656 WP No. 66797 of 2011 28.10.2010 allowed the application in part and directed the Corporation to pay a sum of Rs.16,827/-. This order is called into question in this Writ Petition on several grounds as set out in the Memorandum of Writ Petition. 3. Counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the Writ papers with care. 4. Suffice it to note that the petitioner claimed amount towards washing allowance, uniform allowance, shoe allowance, jerky and raincoat allowances. The Tribunal concluded that he is not entitled for the same since he did not worked for the said period. The conclusion so arrived at by the Tribunal is just and proper. It is significant to note that the petitioner also claimed bonus of Rs.15,000/-. However, there is no base for such a claim and the petitioner has also failed to establish that similarly placed workmen were paid such bonus. The Tribunal extenso referred the material on record and justified in allowing the application under Section 33(C)(2) in part. I find no grounds to interfere with the order passed by the Tribunal. The - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5656 WP No. 66797 of 2011 Writ Petition is devoid of merits and the same is liable to be dismissed. 5. Resultantly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE MRP LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 50