- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2669 WP No. 104817 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 104817 OF 2024 (S-KSRTC) BETWEEN: SRI. LAXMAN S/O. PARASAPPA SUNGAR, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, OCC. DRIVER, ON LIGHTER JOB DUE TO VISUAL DISABILITY AT AND PO: HOSAKADOROLLI, ITAGI CROSS, TQ. BAILHONGAL, DIST. BELAGAVI -591102. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAVI HEGDE, AND SRI VINAYKUMAR BHAT, ADVOCATES) AND: 1. THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, NWKRTC GADAG DIVISION, GADAG, DIST: GADAG- 582101. 2. THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, N.W.K.R.T.C GADAG DIVISION, GADAG, DIST: GADAG- 582101. 3. THE ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, N.W.K.R.T.C GADAG DIVISION, GADAG, DIST: GADAG- 582101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI PRASHANT HOSAMANI, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA IS PRAYING TO, ISSUE WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 21/08/2023, BEARING NO. VAKARASA/ GAVI/ SIBBANDI/ C-5/1408/23, PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-C, AS SEQUEL DIRECT THE 1ST Digitally signed by VISHAL NINGAPPA PATTIHAL Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2669 WP No. 104817 of 2024 RESPONDENT TO RE-FIX THE SALARY CONSIDERING THE ENTIRE SERVICE BY ONLY DENYING 3 INCREMENTS AND PAY DIFFERENCE OF WAGES TOO, BY FIXING OUTER LIMIT, AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO PAY THE WAGES FROM THE DATE OF ORDER DATED 18/12/2021 PASSED IN WP 146106/2020 (L-KSRTC) (LOK ADALATH NO.2016/2021) VIDE ANNEXURE-B TILL 26/07/2022 DATE ON WHICH ACTUALLY HE WAS REINSTATED, BY FIXING OUTER LIMIT, AND ISSUE ANY OTHER DIRECTIONS BEFITTING THE SITUATIONS AND IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA) 1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayer: 1. Issue writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 21/08/2023, bearing no. VAKARASA/ GAVI/ SIBBANDI/ C-5/1408/23, passed by the 3rd respondent vide ANNEXURE-C, as sequel direct the 1st respondent to re-fix the salary considering the entire service by only denying 3 increments and pay difference of wages too, by fixing outer limit, and 2. Direct the respondents to pay the wages from the date of order dated 18/12/2021 passed in WP 146106/2020 (L-KSRTC) (LOK ADALATH NO.2016/2021) VIDE ANNEXURE-B TILL 26/07/2022 date on which actually he was reinstated, by fixing outer limit, and 3. Issue any other directions befitting the situations and in the ends of justice. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2669 WP No. 104817 of 2024 2. Heard the learned counsel Shri Ravi Hegde appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel Shri Prashant Hosamani appearing fro respondent. 3. The facts in brief germane are as follows: 4. The petitioner comes to be appointed as a Driver in the year 1998, on the allegation of certain misconduct comes to be dismissed from service. The dismissal is questioned before the Labour Court. The Labour Court allows the dispute and directs reinstatement with continuity of service but without back wages. Aggrieved by the said order, the Management is before this Court in Writ Petition No.146106/2020. The matter was settled before the Lok Adalath. The employee gave up the right for back wages, consequential benefits and the penalty was modified withholding of three increments and has agreed but reinstatement and continuity of service was agreed upon. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2669 WP No. 104817 of 2024 5. The petitioner is before the Court seeking re- fixation of salary considering the entire service by deducting three increments that had to be deducted in terms of the compromise. The issue therefore lies in a narrow compass and the compromise entered into between the petitioner and the respondent management is as follows: “JOINT MEMO OF SETTLEMENT These cases have been referred to Lok Adalath by the Hon'ble High Court under Sec. 20 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987. The Parties to the Petition have settled their claims before the Lok Adalath on the following terms :- 1. The Petitioner Corporation has challenged the legality and correctness of the orders of the Hon'ble Labour Court, Hubballi in KID No. 14/2017. The Respondent was the Driver in Petitioner Corporation and was dismissed from service vide order dated 10.02.2017 in an unauthorised absent case, The Labour Court directed for re-instatement of the Respondent workman without backwages, without consequential benefits but with continuity of service by its order dated 24.04.2019. Being aggrieved with the said orders, the Petitioner Corporation filed present W. P. No. 146106/2020 before this Hon'ble High Court. On detailed discussions both the petitioner and the Respondent and their counsels have decided to enter into compromise on the following terms. 2. The Petitioner Corporation agreed to re-instate the Respondent workman back into service with continuity of service, without consequential benefits and without backwages from the date of dismissal till the date of actual re-instatement by withholding three annual increments with cumulative effect. The - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2669 WP No. 104817 of 2024 Peitioner Corporation agreed to re-instate the Respondent workman within 3 months from the date of orders of this High Court in pursuance of the settlement herein. 3. The Respondent workman is not entitled to the wages or any arrears of wages from the date of dismissal till his actual re-instatement. 4. The settlement has been entered into in the interest of both the parties and without any duress or force. The settlement is fair, legal and reasonable also. WHEREFORE, both the parties pray that, the above matters may be disposed of in terms of the aforesaid joint settlement and the award impugned be modified suitably, and in terms of the settlement, in the ends of justice and equity.” 6. In terms of the compromise, the petitioner was entitled to continuity of service but without back wages, therefore, the continuity of service will be the salary of the petitioner has to be refixed, non-fixation would lead to anomaly both his pay and the terminal benefits at the time of payment. Therefore the respondents ought to have reworked with the salary of the petitioner by taking the service rendered throughout and denying three increments as agreed upon in the afore-quoted settlement. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2669 WP No. 104817 of 2024 7. Learned counsel Shri Prashant Hosamani submits that, if reasonable time is granted the reworking would happen and the anomaly if any could be rectified. 8. In that light of the said submission, I deem it appropriate to dispose the petition directing the respondents to refix the salary of the petitioner owing to the settlement as quoted, herein above, within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, if not earlier. 9. As a matter of form, the order dated 21.08.2023 passed by the third respondent vide Annexure-C stands quashed. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE VNP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27