- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16523 WP No. 112407 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO. 112407 OF 2014 (L-KSRTC) BETWEEN: THE MANAGEMENT OF NWKRTC, HUBLI DIVISION, RPTD. BY ITS DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, HUBBALLI, THE PETITIONER IS REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER, NWKRTC CENTRAL OFFICE, HUBBALLI. … PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRASHANT HOSMANI, ADVOCATE) AND: MAHADEVAPPA S/O. HULLAPPA ABBIGERI, SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’s., 1. SMT. PARVATEVVA W/O. MAHADEVAPPA ABBIGERI, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD. 2. CHANDRASHEKAR S/O. MAHADEVAPPA ABBIGERI, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT. Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.12.05 10:52:34 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16523 WP No. 112407 of 2014 3. KUMARI. SAVITA D/O. MAHADEVAPPA ABBIGERI, AGED ABOUT 17 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT. 4. KUMARI. JYOTI D/O. MAHADEVAPPA ABBIGERI, AGED ABOUT 14 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT. 5. KUMARI. LALITA D/O. MAHADEVAPPA ABBIGERI, AGED ABOUT 12 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, (THE RESPONDENTS NO.3 TO 5 ARE MINORS REPRESENTED BY THEIR NATURAL MOTHER RESPONDENT NO.1) ALL ARE R/O. BALAGANOORU, TQ: GADAG, DIST: GADAG. … RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO, QUASH THE AWARD DATED 21.01.2014, PASSED BY THE LEARNED LABOUR COURT, HUBBALLI IN ID.NO.101/2012 THE COPY OF THE SAME IS PRODUCED AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE-B TO THE WRIT PETITION AND CONSEQUENTLY BE PLEASED TO DISMISS THE ID. NO.101/2012 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT ON THE FILE OF LABOUR COURT, HUBBALLI AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16523 WP No. 112407 of 2014 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) Two applications are filed to condone the delay of 2,603 days in filing the application to recall the order dated 02.12.2015 dismissing the petition for non-prosecution and to recall the order dated 02.12.2015. 2. It is noticed that the petition is dismissed for non compliance of office objections. 3. It is submitted that the petition was filed by the earlier panel advocate and said counsel is not in the panel now and when the list of cases entrusted to earlier panel advocate was verified, it is noticed that the present petition was dismissed for non-prosecution. 4. Though the Court is not convinced with the reasons assigned, to do complete justice to the parties, the application for condonation of delay of 2603 days in filing the application to recall the order dated 02.12.2015 is allowed. Consequently, the application to recall the order dated 02.12.2015 is allowed. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16523 WP No. 112407 of 2014 Order dated 02.12.2015 is recalled and petition is restored to file. 5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Petitioner has assailed the award dated 21.01.2014 in terms of which, the claim by the workman is allowed-in-part. Order of dismissal dated 16.01.2010 was set aside and the Labour Court directed backwages from the date of dismissal till the date of death of the claimant who died during the pendency of the proceeding before the Labour Court. 6. It is noticed that the employee was dismissed from employment on the premise that he has not issued tickets to two passengers while he was on duty on 11.4.1985. The workman had contented that the enquiry was not fair and proper and order of dismissal is invalid for non-compliance of requirement of Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (Act, 1947). 7. The Labour Court has also held that the enquiry was not fair and proper and permitted both parties to lead evidence. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16523 WP No. 112407 of 2014 8. After considering the evidence of both sides, the Court held that charges are proved, however set aside the order of dismissal on the premise that there is no compliance of Section 33(2)(b) of the Act, 1947. 9. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would contend that non-compliance of Section 33(2)(b) is only a procedural infirmity and that cannot be a ground to set aside the order of dismissal when the charges are established. 10. The Court is unable to accept the said contention. 11. The law in this regard is well settled in terms of the law laid down in Jaipur Zila Sahakari Bhoomi Vikas Bank Ltd vs. Ram Gopal Sharma and Others1. It is also noticed that the workman died during the pendency of the proceeding before the Labour Court. Backwages is ordered to be granted in favour of the legal representatives. It is not the case of the petitioner/Corporation that no dispute was pending when workman was removed from service. Under these circumstances, the Court does not find any reason to interfere with the award. 1 (2002) 2 SCC 244 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16523 WP No. 112407 of 2014 12. Hence the following: ORDER (i) Writ Petition is dismissed. (ii) The service benefits payable to the legal representatives shall be paid within 30 days from the date of the receipt of the copy of the order, failing which the respondent/Corporation shall pay interest @ of 8% per annum, from the date of the award till the date of payment, if not already paid. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE BRN CT:BCK LIST NO.: 2 SL NO.: 2