- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15168 RP No. 100035 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA REVIEW PETITION NO. 100035 OF 2024 BETWEEN: KAMLABASHA H. JANGLINAYAK, SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS. 1. FATHOBI W/O. KAMALBASHA JANGALINAYAK, AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: NIL . 2. TASMIA D/O. KAMALBASHA JANGALINAYAK, AGE: 17 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT. 3. MOHAMMAD TAUHID S/O. KAMALBASHA JANGALINAYAK, AGE: 16 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, 4. SUMAYYA S/O. KAMALBASHA JANGALINAYAK, AGE: 13 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT. PETITIONER NO.1 TO 4 ARE MINORS AND BY THEIR NATURAL GUARDINA MOTHER REV. PETITION N.1 FATHOBI W/O. KAMALBASHA JANGLINAYAK. NOW ALL ARE R/O AT C/O KAMALABASHA KHB COLONY HULAKOTI, GADAG DISTRICT – 582 205. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. RAVI HEGDE, ADVOCATE) AND: KAMALABASHA H JANGLINAYAK SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR 1. KASHIMBI W/O. HUSSAINSAB JANGALINAYAK, AGE: 70 YEARS, OCC: NIL, R/O: ANJANEYA NAGAR, GOA ROAD, KELAGERI, DHARWAD, DIST: DHARWAD – 580 008. VISHAL NINGAPPA PATTIHAL Digitally signed by VISHAL NINGAPPA PATTIHAL Location: High Court of Karnataka Dharwad Bench Date: 2025.11.07 11:53:38 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15168 RP No. 100035 of 2024 2. THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, NWKRTC DHARWAD DIVISION, DHARWAD, DIST: DHARWAD – 580 008. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. R.M.JAVED, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. PRASHANT S. HOSAMANI, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER SECTION 114 R/W UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF CPC, PRAYING TO, CALL FOR RECORDS. MODIFY THE ORDER DATED 23.08.2023 PASSED BY THIS HONBLE COURT IN WRIT PETITION NO.105133/2021 (L-KSRTC) BY MODIFY THE ORDER BY ALLOWING THIS REVIEW PETITION IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA) 1. This Court on 23.08.2023 had passed the following order: 1. “The petitioner-NWKRTC (for short the Corporation) is before this court calling in question an award of the labour court dated 28.1.2021, passed in KID No.15/2019 holding that the workman was entitled to reinstatement with back wages at 25%. 2. Heard Sri.Prashant S Hosmani, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner; Sri.R.M.Javed, learned counsel appearing for respondent No1(A) and Sri.Ravi Hegde and Sri.Vinayakumar Bhat, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.1(B). 3. Facts in brief, germane, are as follows: 4. The workman at the relevant point in time was working as a data entry operator in the Corporation. It is the allegation that the workman had become an alcoholic and was always attending duties in an inebriated state. The corporation therefore initiated proceedings - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15168 RP No. 100035 of 2024 against him by issuance of the charge sheet. The allegations in the charge sheet was that the workman whenever checked with breath analyzer, presence of alcohol crossed the permissible limits. After conduct of a departmental enquiry, the disciplinary authority imposes the penalty of dismissal form service upon the workman. 5. The workman calls this in question before the labour court in KID 15/2019. The labour court sets aside the order of dismissal from service, in terms of an award dated 28.1.2021 and directs reinstatement of the workman with 25% back wages. After the passage of the award, it transpires that the workman dies, and the legal representatives have come on record. In the light of the death of the workman, there can be no reinstatement into service. What remains to be considered is only the portion of continuity of service and back wages for the purpose of benefits to the legal representatives. 6. A perusal at the reasons rendered by the labour Court would clearly indicate that they are cogent and would not require any interference at the hands of this Court. It is to be noticed that the only allegation against the workman was that he was at time, coming in an inebriated state. The labour court holds that the penalty of dismissal from service for the aforesaid misconduct was grossly disproportionate. Therefore, it sets aside the award of the labour court. The award thus does not warrant any interference. The petition deserves to be rejected with a direction to the Corporation to pay the legal representatives of the workman, the benefit of continuity of service and 25 % back wages. 7. At this juncture, the learned counsel Sri.Ravi Hegde and R.M.Javedh, who represents all the legal representatives of the workman, including the mother would submit that to wardoff any unnecessary litigation in future, the termination benefits be divided into two halves, one to the legal representatives to whom Sri.Ravi Hegde represents and other half to the mother, to whom Sri.R.M.Javed represents. Since this submission is made on a consensus, I deem it appropriate to record the same in the order and direct such compliance to the Corporation. For the aforesaid reasons, the following: - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15168 RP No. 100035 of 2024 ORDER i) Writ petition is dismissed. ii) The legal representatives are held entitled to benefits of continuity of service and 25% of the back wages to the legal representatives of the workman. iii) The terminal benefits shall be divided in terms of the aforesaid submissions of both the counsel with consensus. iv) The benefits shall be disbursed to the legal representatives as aforesaid within three months from the date of receipt of copy of the order.” 2. At paragraph No.7 of the order, on the submission made by the counsels, the amount of compensation was sought to be divided between the wife and children of the deceased and the mother at 50% each. 3. The review petition is now filed seeking review of the said order on the ground that there are 3 children from the wedlock of the deceased and the wife. The mother of the deceased is now 75 years old is also getting ₹.1,000/- from the State. The wife and the children of the deceased, who are now aged, 13, 15 and 17 would need some more money. In that light, I deem it appropriate to vary the apportionment by - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15168 RP No. 100035 of 2024 granting 30% to the mother and 70% to the wife and children of the deceased. 4. The order is modified accordingly. The review petition to the aforesaid extent stands allowed and disposed. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE VNP / CT-ASC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8