- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14945 WP No. 64422 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO.64422 OF 2011 (L-KSRTC) BETWEEN: ANNASAHEB S/O HANUMANTHRAO KULKARNI, AGE: 68 YEARS, OCC: RETD. SERVICE, R/O. DHARWAD. … PETITIONER (BY SRI. ANANT P. SAVADI, ADVOCATE) AND: THE MANAGEMENT OF NORTH-WEST KARNATAKA ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, REP. BY DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, BELGAUM DIVISION, BELGAUM. … RESPONDENT (BY SRI. MADAN MOHAN M. KHANNUR, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER ORDER OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE QUASHING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ADDITIONAL LABOUR COURT, HUBLI IN APPLICATION NO.34/2001 DATED: 01/04/2009 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-F. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14945 WP No. 64422 of 2011 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) 1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and respondent. 2. The petitioner is before this Court challenging the order passed by the Additional Labour Court, Hubballi in Application No.34/2001. 3. The petitioner before this Court had moved an application under Section 33-C (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 to claim the benefits conferred under the award passed by the Labour Court in Reference No.172/1993, on the file of Additional Labour Court, Hubballi. In terms of the said award, the Labour Court has granted the following reliefs: “In the result, the reference in question is hereby allowed with costs. The impugned order passed by the Respondent dismissing the claimant from service w.e.f., 17.08.1982 is hereby set-aside. Under the circumstances of the case I impose the penalty of stoppage - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14945 WP No. 64422 of 2011 of one increment with cumulative effect. The respondent is hereby directed to pay full back-wages to the claimant w.e.f., 17.08.1982 till he attained the age of superannuation, within 3 (three) months from this day, after deducting one future increment with cumulative effect. In case of default, the claimant is entitled and the Respondent is liable to pay interest at 6% (six) on the said sum from the date it became due.” This award is confirmed by this Court. 4. The operative portion of the Award makes it abundantly clear that the Labour Court has awarded full back wages to the claimant with effect from 17.08.1982, till he attainted the age of superannuation. It also held that the back wages are to be paid after deducting one future increment with cumulative effect. In case of default, the respondent is directed to pay 6% interest on the amount due from the date it became due. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14945 WP No. 64422 of 2011 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the Court has not directed the respondent to pay the full back wages despite the award having attained finality. It is also his submission that since the back wages are not paid within the time stipulated, the petitioner is entitled to 6% interest on the said amount. It is his submission that the Labour Court has concluded that the petitioner has received Rs.1,92,527/- towards wages. It is his further submission that the petitioner was entitled to more than Rs.5,85,989/- as on 14.11.1999. 6. It is urged that the Court has not looked into the evidence led by the parties to ascertain as to what is the exact amount payable. He would also submit that the admission, if any, by the petitioner is only relating to payment of Rs.1,92,527/- and that is not towards the entire back wages payable and the interest payable as in terms of the award. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14945 WP No. 64422 of 2011 7. Learned counsel the respondent would submit that the petitioner himself has admitted that Rs.1,92,527/- is paid and as such, the Court is justified in dismissing the application. 8. This Court has considered the contentions raised at the Bar and perused the records. 9. It is to be noticed that the petitioner was found guilty of charges. However, the Labour Court has held that the penalty of dismissal is disproportionate to the charges proved. Accordingly, the penalty is modified and he was ordered to be reinstated with full back wages and deduction of one increment with cumulative effect. 10. This being the position, there has to be a calculation as to what is the full back wages payable by reducing one increment and there has to be interest at the rate of 6% per annum, in case, there is delay - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14945 WP No. 64422 of 2011 in paying the amount. These aspects have not been considered by the Labour Court. 11. For the aforementioned reasons, this Court is of the view that the impugned order has to be set-aside and matter has to be remitted to the Labour Court to consider the following; a. What is the back wages payable to the petitioner by deducting one increment with cumulative effect from the date of dismissal till the date of superannuation; b. What is the interest payable from the amount due, till the date of payment; c. What is the amount paid to the petitioner and said payment is under which head? Whether it is towards payment of back wages or any other service benefits like gratuity and retirement benefits? 12. If it is found that the full back wages are not paid and amount is still due, then the petitioner is entitled to interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date when it became due. That means, the amount due for each month has to be calculated - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14945 WP No. 64422 of 2011 and 6% interest has to be paid on the said amount. If it is found that entire amount is paid, then the petition has to be dismissed. Hence, the following: ORDER i. Writ petition is allowed. ii. Impugned order dated 01.04.2009, on the file of Additional Labour Court, Hubballi in Application No.34/2001, is quashed. iii. The matter is remitted to the Labour Court for fresh consideration, on the points referred to above. iv. The parties are permitted to lead additional evidence, if any. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE AM CT:BCK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 48 - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14945 WP No. 64422 of 2011