- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24098 WP No. 44798 of 2012 C/W WP No. 2163 of 2013 WP No. 2164 of 2013 AND 8 OTHERS IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT WRIT PETITION NO. 44798 OF 2012 (L-TER) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 2163 OF 2013 WRIT PETITION NO. 2164 OF 2013 WRIT PETITION NO. 2165 OF 2013 WRIT PETITION NO. 2166 OF 2013 WRIT PETITION NO. 2172 OF 2013 WRIT PETITION NO. 2434 OF 2013 WRIT PETITION NO. 2476 OF 2013 WRIT PETITION NO. 2477 OF 2013 WRIT PETITION NO. 17920 OF 2014 AND WRIT PETITION NO. 17921 OF 2014 IN W.P.NO.44798/2012: BETWEEN: SRI NANJUNDA SWAMY AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS S/O NANJAIAH JUNIOR ASSISTANT (LEDGER) CHESOM, H.D. KOTE SUB-DIVISION MYSORE DIVISION R/AT CHOWDAHALLI, JAKKALLI POST H D KOTE POST MYSORE DISTRICT …PETITIONER (BY SRI B.D. KUTTAPPA, ADVOCATE) IN W.P.NO.2163/2013: SRI RAJAGOPAL, S/O C. GOPAL SETTY, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, JUNIOR ASSISTANT, CHAMUNDESHWARI ELECTRICITY SUPPLY CO. LTD., Digitally signed by MARIGANGAIAH PREMAKUMARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24098 WP No. 44798 of 2012 C/W WP No. 2163 of 2013 WP No. 2164 of 2013 AND 8 OTHERS H.D. KOTE SUB DIVISION, MYSORE DISTRICT, (NOW TERMINATED FROM SERVICE) PRESENTLY R/A BEHIND CHAMUNDESHWARI TEMPLE, SARAGUR, H.D. KOTE TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT. …..PETITIONER (BY SRI B.D. KUTTAPPA, ADVOCATE) IN W.P.NO.2164/2013: BETWEEN: SMT MANJULA G P AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS D/O G D PUTTASWAMY JUNIOR ASSISTANT CHAMUNDESHWARI ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LTD., H D KOTE SUB-DIVISION (EARLIER KNOWN AS MESCOM) H D KOTE SUB-DIVISION MYSORE DISTRICT (NOW TERMINATED FROM SERVICE) PRESENTLY R/A D NO.1420 VISHWANATHA COLONY H D KOTE TLAUK, MYSORE DISTRICT. …. PETITIONER (BY SRI B.D. KUTTAPPA, ADVOCATE) IN W.P.NO.2165/2013: BETWEEN: SRI M MAHADEVU AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS S/O MADAIAH, JUNIOR ASSISTANT CHAMUNDESHWARI ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LTD., (EARLIER KNOWN AS MESCOM) RESIDING AT HOSABADAVANE SIDDINAPURA, KOLLEGAL TALUK CHAMARAJANAGARA TALUK & DIST. … PETITIONER (BY SRI B.D. KUTTAPPA, ADVOCATE) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24098 WP No. 44798 of 2012 C/W WP No. 2163 of 2013 WP No. 2164 of 2013 AND 8 OTHERS IN W.P.NO.2166/2013: BETWEEN: SRI M SHIVAKUMAR AGED ABOUT 39 YERS S/O LATE V V MUDDAIAH CHAMUNDESHWARI ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LTD., GOPALAPURA (EARLIER KNOWN AS MESCOM) T NARASIPURA TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT PRESENTLY R/A NO.20, GOPALAPURA T NARASIPURA TALUK MYSORE DISTRICT 572 124. … PETITIONER (BY SRI B.D. KUTTAPPA, ADVOCATE) IN W.P.NO.2172/2013: BETWEEN: SRI B.LOKESH AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS S/O B BASAVEGOWDA, LEDGER ASSISTANT CHAMUNDESHWARI ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LTD., GOPALAPURA (EARLIER KNOWN AS MESCOM) H D KOTE, MYSORE DISTRICT (NOW TERMINATED FROM SERVICE) PRESENTLY RESIDING AT NO.1691 K H B COLONY, H D KOTE, MYSORE DISTRICT. …..PETITIONER (BY SRI B.D. KUTTAPPA, ADVOCATE) IN W.P.NO.2434/2013: BETWEEN: SRI S SIDDARAJU S/O SIDDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS JUNIOR ASSISTANT CHAMUNDESHWARI ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LTD (EARLIER KNOWN AS MESCOM) T NARASIPURA TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT PRESENTLY R/A D NO. 212 KEERTHI NAGAR MALAVALLI TOWN, MANDYA DISTRICT ….. PETITIONER (BY SRI B.D. KUTTAPPA, ADVOCATE) - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24098 WP No. 44798 of 2012 C/W WP No. 2163 of 2013 WP No. 2164 of 2013 AND 8 OTHERS IN W.P.NO.2476/2013: BETWEEN: SRI H L SRINIVAS S/O H L LAKSHMIKANTH AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS ASSISTANT, CHAMUNDESHWARI ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LTD., H D KOTE SUB DIVISION (EARLIER KNOWN AS MESCOM) H D KOTE SUB DIVISION, MYSORE DISTRICT (NOW TERMINATED FROM SERVICE) PRESENTLY R/A MUTT STREET, HULLAHALLI, NANJANGUD TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT. ….. PETITIONER (BY SRI B.D. KUTTAPPA, ADVOCATE) IN W.P.NO.2477/2013: BETWEEN: SMT SHIRANA D/O EJAJ AHMED, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS JUNIOR ASSISTANT CHAMUNDESHWARI ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LTD., H D KOTE SUB-DIVISION (EARLIER KNOWN AS MESCOM) H D KOTE SUB DIVISION, MYSORE DISTRICT (NOW TERMINATED FROM SERVICE) PRESENTLY R/A D.NO. 1593, MUSLIM BLOCK HUNSUR TOWN, MYSORE DISTRICT. ….. PETITIONER (BY SRI B.D. KUTTAPPA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER M E S C O M CENTRAL ZONE SRIHARSHA ROAD, MYSORE - 570 001. 2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER CHESCOM SUB-DIVISION H D KOTE TALUK MYSORE DISTRICT - 570 024. …RESPONDENTS (COMMON) (BY SRI H.V. DEVARAJU, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2) - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24098 WP No. 44798 of 2012 C/W WP No. 2163 of 2013 WP No. 2164 of 2013 AND 8 OTHERS IN W.P.NO.17920/2014: BETWEEN: 1. SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER MESCOM, CHESCOM (KEB) NEW BUILDING, F.T.S CIRCLE N.R.MOHALLA, MYSORE - 570 002. 2. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER MESCOM, CHESCOM, KEB, H.D.KOTE TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT - 570 005. ….. PETITIONERS (BY SMT. PADMA S. UTTUR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1 . MR P MAHESH S/O PUTTAMADIAH, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, D.NO.100, AMBEDKAR BEEDHI, SARGUR, H.D.KOTE TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT. 2 . M/S BADRI MADHUSUDAN AND SRINIVAS CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT 461/F-18, 1ST FLOOR PUTTU PLAZA, M.G.ROAD, MYSORE-570 004. RESPONDENT NO.2 IS DELETED ER ORDER DATED 07.01.2025 ….. RESPONDENTS (BY SRI B.D. KUTTAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR R1; V/O DATED 07.01.2025 R2 STANDS DELETED) IN W.P.NO.17921/2014: BETWEEN: 1. SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER MESCOM, CHESCOM (KEB) NEW BUILDING, F.T.S CIRCLE N.R.MOHALLA,MYSORE. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24098 WP No. 44798 of 2012 C/W WP No. 2163 of 2013 WP No. 2164 of 2013 AND 8 OTHERS 2. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER MESCOM, CHESCOM, KEB, H.D.KOTE TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT. ….. PETITIONERS (BY SMT. PADMA S. UTTUR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1 . MR LOKESH B S/O BUNDAIAH, THUMBASOGE POST, H.D.KOTE TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT. 2 . M/S BADRI MADHUSUDAN & SRINIVAS CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT, 461/F-18,1ST FLOOR, PUTTU PLAZA, M.G.ROAD, MYSORE-570 004. RESPONDENT NO.2 IS DELETED AS PER ORDER DATED 07.01.2025 …. RESPONDENTS (BY SRI B.D. KUTTAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR R1; V/O DATED 07.01.2025 R2 STANDS DELETED) THIS W.P. NO.44798/2012 IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS OF THE CASE IN I.I.D. NO.50/2007 ON THE FILE OF LABOUR COURT AT MYSORE. QUASH THE AWARD DATED 19.11.2010 PASSED BY THE LABOUR COURT AT MYSORE IN I.D. NO.50/2007 ON THE MERITS OF THE CASE, A CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-M AS THE SAID ORDER OR AWARD SUFFERS FROM ERROR APPARENT ON THE FACE OF THE RECORD AND ETC., THIS W.P. NO.2163/2013 IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS OF THE CASE IN I.D. NO.56/2007 ON THE FILE OF LABOUR COURT AT MYSORE & GRANT PETITIONER. QUASH THE AWARD DATED 19.11.2010 PASSED BY THE LABOUR COURT AT MYSORE IN I.I.D. NO.47/2007 ON THE MERITS OF THE CASE, A - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24098 WP No. 44798 of 2012 C/W WP No. 2163 of 2013 WP No. 2164 of 2013 AND 8 OTHERS CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-M AS THE SAID ORDER AND ETC., THIS W.P. NO.2164/2013 IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS OF THE CASE IN I.I.D. NO.48/2007 ON THE FILE OF LABOUR COURT AT MYSORE. QUASH THE AWARD DATED 19.11.2010 PASSED BY THE LABOUR COURT AT MYSORE IN I.D. NO.48/2007 ON THE MERITS OF THE CASE, A CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-M AS THE SAID ORDER OR AWARD SUFFERS FROM ERROR APPARENT ON THE FACE OF THE RECORD AND ETC., THIS W.P. NO.2165/2013 IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS OF THE CASE IN I.I.D. NO.55/2007 ON THE FILE OF LABOUR COURT AT MYSORE. QUASH THE AWARD DATED 19.11.2010 PASSED BY THE LABOUR COURT AT MYSORE IN I.D. NO.55/2007 ON THE MERITS OF THE CASE, A CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-M AS THE SAID ORDER OR AWARD SUFFERS FROM ERROR APPARENT ON THE FACE OF THE RECORD AND ETC., THIS W.P. NO.2166/2013 IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS OF THE CASE IN I.I.D. NO.51/2007 ON THE FILE OF LABOUR COURT AT MYSORE. QUASH THE AWARD DATED 19.11.2010 PASSED BY THE LABOUR COURT AT MYSORE IN I.D. NO.51/2007 ON THE MERITS OF THE CASE, A CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-M AS THE SAID ORDER OR AWARD SUFFERS FROM ERROR APPARENT ON THE FACE OF THE RECORD AND ETC., THIS W.P. NO.2172/2013 IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS OF THE CASE IN I.I.D. NO.53/2007 ON THE FILE OF LABOUR COURT AT MYSORE. QUASH THE AWARD DATED 19.11.2010 PASSED BY THE LABOUR COURT AT MYSORE IN I.D. NO.53/2007 ON THE MERITS OF THE CASE, A CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-M AS THE SAID ORDER OR AWARD SUFFERS FROM ERROR APPARENT ON THE FACE OF THE RECORD AND ETC., THIS W.P. NO.2434/2013 IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24098 WP No. 44798 of 2012 C/W WP No. 2163 of 2013 WP No. 2164 of 2013 AND 8 OTHERS ENTIRE RECORDS OF THE CASE IN I.I.D. NO.88/2007 ON THE FILE OF LABOUR COURT AT MYSORE. QUASH THE AWARD DATED 19.11.2010 PASSED BY THE LABOUR COURT AT MYSORE IN I.D. NO.88/2007 ON THE MERITS OF THE CASE, A CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-M AS THE SAID ORDER OR AWARD SUFFERS FROM ERROR APPARENT ON THE FACE OF THE RECORD AND ETC., THIS W.P. NO.2476/2013 IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS OF THE CASE IN I.I.D. NO.56/2007 ON THE FILE OF LABOUR COURT AT MYSORE. QUASH THE AWARD DATED 19.11.2010 PASSED BY THE LABOUR COURT AT MYSORE IN I.D. NO.56/2007 ON THE MERITS OF THE CASE, A CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-M AS THE SAID ORDER OR AWARD SUFFERS FROM ERROR APPARENT ON THE FACE OF THE RECORD AND ETC., THIS W.P. NO.2477/2013 IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS OF THE CASE IN I.I.D. NO.52/2007 ON THE FILE OF LABOUR COURT AT MYSORE. QUASH THE AWARD DATED 19.11.2010 PASSED BY THE LABOUR COURT AT MYSORE IN I.D. NO.52/2007 ON THE MERITS OF THE CASE, A CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-M AS THE SAID ORDER OR AWARD SUFFERS FROM ERROR APPARENT ON THE FACE OF THE RECORD AND ETC., THIS W.P. NO.17920/2014 IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS ON THE FILE OF LABOUR COURT AT MYSORE AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 29.8.2013 (ANNX-A) PASSED IN REF.NO.69 OF 2008 AND SET ASIDE THE SAME AS NULL AND VOID. DECLARE THAT THE RESPONDENT IS NOT ENTITLED FOR RE- INSTATEMENT, CONTINUITY OF SERVICE AND BACK WAGES AND ETC., THIS W.P. NO.17921/2014 IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS ON THE FILE OF LABOUR COURT AT MYSORE AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 29.8.2013 (ANNX-A) PASSED IN REF.NO.70 OF 2008 AND SET ASIDE THE SAME AS NULL AND VOID. DECLARE THAT THE RESPONDENT IS NOT ENTITLED FOR RE- INSTATEMENT, CONTINUITY OF SERVICE AND BACK WAGES AND ETC., - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24098 WP No. 44798 of 2012 C/W WP No. 2163 of 2013 WP No. 2164 of 2013 AND 8 OTHERS THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT ORAL ORDER The petitioners are before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India aggrieved by award dated 19.11.2010 passed by the Labour Court at Mysuru in I.D.No.50/2007 (Annexure-M), I.D.No.47/2007 (Annexure-E), I.D.No.48/2007 (Annexure-E), I.D.No.55/2007 (Annexure-E), I.D.No.51/2007 (Annexure-E), I.D.No.53/2007 (Annexure-E), I.D.No.88/2007 (Annexure-E), I.D.No.56/2007 (Annexure-E) and I.D.No.52/2007 (Annexure-D) rejecting the claim of the petitioner to direct the second party i.e., respondents herein to reinstate the petitioner with backwages and all other consequential benefits from the date of illegal/oral removal from service till the date of his reinstatement into service in all the above writ petitions except W.P.No.17920/2014 and W.P.No.17921/2014. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24098 WP No. 44798 of 2012 C/W WP No. 2163 of 2013 WP No. 2164 of 2013 AND 8 OTHERS 2. The petitioners are workmen and they are before this Court questioning the award wherein their request for reinstatement and grant of consequential benefits are rejected. Whereas, W.P.No.17920/2014 and W.A.No.17921/2014 are by MESCOM questioning the award whereunder the claim of the workmen are allowed with a direction to the petitioners to reinstate the workmen into service to the same post last held by them with 50% backwages from the date of termination i.e., from 31.01.2007 till the date of reinstatement. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the workmen approached the Labour Court on reference by the State and workmen in their claim statement stated that they were appointed as Assistants by the MESCOM as well as CHESCOM to maintain the ledgers. Though initially they were issued with appointment orders, the said appointment orders were taken back. It is the case of the workmen that they were engaged as Assistants to maintain the ledgers from 1998 onwards. It is the case of - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24098 WP No. 44798 of 2012 C/W WP No. 2163 of 2013 WP No. 2164 of 2013 AND 8 OTHERS the workmen that they were denied work or refused work from 31.01.2007 without any notice. Further, it is stated that the workmen have put in continuous service for more than 10 years and their illegal/wrongful refusal of work is illegal. Further, they have stated that without there being any reason dispensed their services which is opposed to the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Further, the claim statement would state that workmen have worked for 242 days in a year in the respondent/establishment every year during their tenure, as such, they submit that they would be entitled for reinstatement as well as regularization. 4. The respondent-MESCOM as well as CHESCOM filed their counter statement denying the claim averments particularly stating that the workmen were entrusted the work of ledger maintenance by the contractors to whom the contract work was entrusted after duly calling for tenders. It is the specific contention of the respondents i.e., MESCOM/CHESCOM that the workmen were engaged - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24098 WP No. 44798 of 2012 C/W WP No. 2163 of 2013 WP No. 2164 of 2013 AND 8 OTHERS by contractors and there is no relationship of employer and employee between the first party and second party before the Labour Court. It is stated that the respondents MESCOM/CHESCOM neither appointed the workmen nor terminated. Therefore, it is stated that the question of reinstating the workmen would not arise. 5. The employees led their evidence and marked documents on their behalf. The respondent-second party also examined MW1 as its witness and it also marked documents on its behalf. 6. The Labour Court by award dated 29.08.2013 in Ref.Nos.69/2008 and 70/2008 rejected the claim of the workmen. Challenging the said award, the workmen are before this Court in W.P.Nos.44798/2012, 2163/2013, 2164/2013, 2165/2013, 2166/2013, 2172/2013, 2434/2013, 2476/2013, 2477/2013 and in W.P.Nos.17920/2014 and 17921/2014 the respondents MESCOM/CHESCOM is in appeal, wherein the Labour Court - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24098 WP No. 44798 of 2012 C/W WP No. 2163 of 2013 WP No. 2164 of 2013 AND 8 OTHERS allowed the claim of the workmen directing the respondents MESCOM/CHESCOM to reinstate the workmen into service with 50% backwages from the date of termination i.e., 31.01.2007 till the date of reinstatement. 7. Heard learned counsel Sri.B.D.Kuttappa for petitioners/workmen as well as learned counsel Sri.H.V.Devaraju for respondents MESCOM/CHESCOM, learned counsel Smt.Padma S. Uttur for petitioner/management in W.P.Nos.17920/2014 and 17921/2014 and learned counsel Sri.B.D.Kuttappa for respondent/workmen. Perused the entire writ petition papers as well as original records in I.D.No.50/2007 on the file of the Labour Court. 8. Learned counsel Sri.B.D.Kuttappa would submit that the Labour Court is not justified in dismissing the claim of the workmen in reinstatement and backwages since the workmen were engaged by the respondents MESCOM/CHESCOM for maintenance of ledger. Further, he - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24098 WP No. 44798 of 2012 C/W WP No. 2163 of 2013 WP No. 2164 of 2013 AND 8 OTHERS submits that the workmen were regular employees of the respondents MESCOM/CHESCOM. Though initially they were issued with order of appointment, the same was taken back with a promise that they would be provided with better service conditions. It is submitted that the workmen were initially engaged in the year 1997-98 and they were continued for more than 10 years. It is also his submission that the petitioners worked for more than 242 days in each year and they would be entitled for regularization also. 9. Learned counsel invites attention of this Court to evidence of the workmen and also statement enclosed to Ex.W10 and submits that the statement would not indicate the name of the contractor or any other person. Therefore, he submits that the said statement of the respondents MESCOM/CHESCOM which contains the name of the workmen which clearly indicates that the workmen were employees of the respondents MESCOM/CHESCOM. It is submitted that the Labour Court failed to appreciate - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24098 WP No. 44798 of 2012 C/W WP No. 2163 of 2013 WP No. 2164 of 2013 AND 8 OTHERS the material on record and has come to a wrong conclusion. Further, learned counsel would submit that the contractor is not a registered contractor and agreement entered into between the Chartered Accountants and MESCOM/CHESCOM is only for six months and subsequently that has not been continued. Therefore, learned counsel would submit that by placing reliance on these documents, the Labour Court committed error in dismissing the claim of the workmen. 10. Per contra, learned counsel Sri.H.V.Devaraju as well as learned counsel Smt.Padma S. Uttur would submit that the workmen are not the employees of respondents MESCOM/CHESCOM, but they were employees of the contractor. It is submitted that the contractor was entrusted with the work of maintaining ledger and in turn, the contractor has engaged the service of the workmen for maintaining the ledger. It is submitted that the workmen were working under the Chartered Accountants and they are not employees of the principal employee. Learned - 16 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24098 WP No. 44798 of 2012 C/W WP No. 2163 of 2013 WP No. 2164 of 2013 AND 8 OTHERS counsel Smt.Padma S. Uttur invites attention of this Court to the agreement produced in W.P.No.17920/2014 which was marked as document No.Ex.M1 before the Labour Court i.e., agreement between the Chartered Accountants and respondents MESCOM/CHESCOM and submits that that ledger maintaining work was entrusted to the contractors after calling for tenders. It is submitted that refusing work to the petitioners by the respondents MESCOM/CHESCOM would not arise, as they are not the workmen appointed by the respondents MESCOM/CHESCOM. Learned counsel for the respondents would place reliance on the judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.24430/2019 dated 30.08.2021 as well as decision of the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.Nos.100404- 100521/2017 and connected Writ Appeals dated 05.07.2019 to contend that the workmen employed by the contractor would not be entitled for any relief, as there is no privity of contract with the workmen and respondents - 17 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24098 WP No. 44798 of 2012 C/W WP No. 2163 of 2013 WP No. 2164 of 2013 AND 8 OTHERS MESCOM/CHESCOM. Thus, they pray for dismissal of the claim statement as well as writ petitions filed by the workmen and to allow the writ petitions filed by the respondents-management i.e., MESCOM/CHESCOM. 11. With the above facts and circumstances and contention raised by the parties, the only point which falls for consideration is as to, Whether the interference is required with the impugned awards passed by the Labour Court? 12. Answer to the above point would be in the Affirmative for the following reasons: The claim of the petitioners/workman is that they were working with the second party MESCOM/CHESCOM since 1998 as Junior Assistants (Ledger) and they were refused work from January 2007 without there being any reason and without notice. It is submitted that the petitioners/workmen by then had completed more than 9 years of service and they had worked for more than 240 - 18 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24098 WP No. 44798 of 2012 C/W WP No. 2163 of 2013 WP No. 2164 of 2013 AND 8 OTHERS days in each year. Therefore, they sought for reinstatement with consequential benefits and also for regularization. The second party MESCOM/CHESCOM specifically contended that the petitioners/workmen are not the workmen under them and second party has not appointed them as Junior Assistants (Ledger). Since there is no employer employee relationship, the petitioners/workmen would not be entitled for any relief. 13. The workmen except making statement that they were appointed by the second party MESCOM/CHESCOM as Junior Assistants (Ledger), have not placed on record any material either to prove their appointment or they were receiving wages from the second party MESCOM/CHESCOM. In the evidence of workmen, i.e., PW1 in all the petitions, it is stated that the order of appointment given was taken back which cannot be believed. The petitioners/workmen have not placed on record any piece of evidence to prove the relationship of employer and employee between first party and second - 19 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24098 WP No. 44798 of 2012 C/W WP No. 2163 of 2013 WP No. 2164 of 2013 AND 8 OTHERS party. The petitioners/workmen placed reliance on the statement enclosed to the letter dated 13.03.2009 addressed by Badari, Madhusudhan and Srinivasn, Chartered Accountants to the Assistant Executive Engineers of MESCOM/CHESCOM to say that they were working in respective divisions as Junior Assistants (Ledger), which is marked as Ex.W10. The said Ex.W10 amply establishes that the petitioners/workmen were working with the Chartered Accountants to whom, MESCOM/CHESCOM had entrusted the work of maintaining the Ledgers. Moreover, the second party MESCOM/CHESCOM has placed on record the agreement entered into between the MESCOM/CHESCOM (Ex.M1) which would establish that the MESCOM/CHESCOM had entrusted the work of maintaining the ledgers to the Chartered Accountants. The first party – workmen has not placed either pay-slip or order of appointment. As such, the contention of the workmen that they were appointed by second party MESCOM/CHESCOM cannot be accepted. - 20 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24098 WP No. 44798 of 2012 C/W WP No. 2163 of 2013 WP No. 2164 of 2013 AND 8 OTHERS 14. This Court in an identical fact situation in W.P.No.24430/2019 dated 30.08.2021 placing reliance on the judgment dated 05.07.2019 in W.A.Nos.100404- 100521/2017 and connected appeals held that the workmen who are engaged by the Contractors working under MESCOM/CHESCOM are not the employees of the second party MESCOM/CHESCOM and there is no privity of contract between the petitioners/workmen and MESCOM/CHESCOM. 15. The Division Bench of this Court in W.A.Nos.100404-100521/2017 and connected matters at paragraph 19, while considering the prayer of the workmen who were working under the contractors of the electricity companies has observed as follows: “19. On account of tender having been called by KPTCL – HESCOM for providing service by personnel, an independent contract agency who was successful bidder was awarded contract to provide service personnel. Accordingly, service provider has provided the - 21 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24098 WP No. 44798 of 2012 C/W WP No. 2163 of 2013 WP No. 2164 of 2013 AND 8 OTHERS petitioners to work in the Sub Station/establishment of Appellant/HESCOM. At the outset, it requires to be noticed that there is no privity of contract between petitioners and KPTCL – HESCOM. The contractual obligation, if any, is between petitioners and the service provider. Thus, appellant KPTCL – HESCOM has no role in the matter of petitioners’ employment. At no point of time, they came to be appointed by KPTCL – HESCOM. In fact, it is not even the case of petitioners, they have been appointed directly by KPTCL – HESCOM. In this background, learned Single Judge by relying upon Uma Devi’s case referred to supra has rightly turned down the prayer of petitioners for regularization, absorption or continuance of petitioners by KPTCL – HESCOM.” 16. In the absence of any material to establish the employer employee relationship between first party and second party and no material to establish privity of contract between first and second party, the Labour Court is justified in dismissing the claim petitions of the petitioners in W.P.Nos.44798/2012, 2163/2013, 2164/2013, - 22 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24098 WP No. 44798 of 2012 C/W WP No. 2163 of 2013 WP No. 2164 of 2013 AND 8 OTHERS 2165/2013, 2166/2013, 2172/2013, 2434/2013, 2476/2013, 2477/2013. The Labour Court was not justified in W.P.Nos.17920/2014 and 17921/2014 on identical fact situation in allowing the claim of the first party-workmen, when there was no material to establish the relationship of employer and employee. 17. For the reasons recorded above, the following: ORDER a) W.P.Nos.44798/2012, 2163/2013, 2164/2013, 2165/2013, 2166/2013, 2172/2013, 2434/2013, 2476/2013, 2477/2013 are rejected. b) W.P.Nos.17920/2014 and 17921/2014 are allowed and the award passed in REF.No.69/2008 and REF.No.70/2008, both dated 29.08.2013 respectively, passed by the Labour Court at Mysuru are set aside. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE NC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20