- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5051 WP No. 106918 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 106918 OF 2023 (L-RES) BETWEEN: SRI. BALA NAIK (B.S. PATIL) S/O SRIPATHI NAIK PATIL, AGED 68 YEARS, R/AT: MADDUR VILLAGE, SAVADATHI TALUK, BELAGAVI DISTRICT, PIN CODE-590 008. … PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRAVEEN S. PATTAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR, OFFICE OF THE LABOUR COMMISSIONER, KARMIKA BHAVANA, BANNERUGHATTA ROAD, BENGALURU-560 029. 2. THE MANAGEMENT OF NWKRTC, BELAGAVI DIVISION, R/BY THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, BELAGAVI DIVISION, BELAGAVI, BELAGAVI DISTRICT, PIN CODE-590 008. 3. THE SENIOR DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER (DISCIPLINARY OFFICER), NORTH-WEST KARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, BELAGAVI DIVISION, BELAGAVI DISTRICT, PIN CODE-590 008. Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5051 WP No. 106918 of 2023 4. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, HUBBALLI DISCIPLINARY SECTION, CENTRAL OFFICE, NORTH WEST KARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, HUBBALLI, DHARWAD DISTRICT PIN CODE-580 009. … RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. MALA B. BHUTE, AGA FOR R1; SRI. PRASHANT S. HOSAMANI, ADVOCATE FOR R2-R4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS. THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER Sri.Praveen S.Pattar., counsel for the petitioner, Smt.Mala B.Bhute., AGA for respondent No.1 and Sri.Prashant.S.Hosamani., counsel for respondents 2 to 4 have appeared in person. 2. The brief facts are these: The workman – Mr Bala Naik was appointed as a Driver in the establishment of the Corporation in Mysuru Division under badge No.7017 in 1979. In 1990-91, he was transferred to Belagavi Division. He came under disciplinary inquiry proceedings for an act of misconduct i.e., unauthorized absence - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5051 WP No. 106918 of 2023 and was visited with an order of punishment i.e., dismissed from service on 07.08.2007. Aggrieved by the same, he preferred an appeal before the Disciplinary Division, Central Office of NWKSRTC, Hubli and the appellate authority dismissed the appeal. The petitioner raised an industrial dispute before the Labor and Conciliation Officer, Belagavi and the same came to be referred to the Labor Court, Belagavi in Ref. No.41/2016. The Labor Court held that the domestic inquiry conducted by the Corporation was not fair and proper. The Labor Court vide award dated 31.01.2018 set aside the order of dismissal and directed the management to pay retirement benefits to the workman. The Labor Court also held that the workman is not entitled to the back wages and consequential benefits from the date of dismissal till attaining the age of superannuation on 30.04.2015. The petitioner has filed the captioned writ petition challenging the denial of back wages and consequential benefits on several grounds as set out in the Memorandum of Writ Petition. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5051 WP No. 106918 of 2023 3. Counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the Writ papers with care. 4. The short point that arises for consideration is whether the Labor Court is justified in denying the back wages and consequential benefits. 5. The facts are sufficiently stated and do not require reiteration. Suffice it to note that the petitioner came under disciplinary inquiry proceedings for an act of misconduct i.e., unauthorized absence and was visited with an order of punishment i.e., dismissed from service on 07.08.2007. However, he raised the dispute after a lapse of nine years. Despite the delay, the Labor Court entertained the reference and directed the management to pay retirement benefits to the workman. Exercising the discretionary powers, the Labor Court declined to award back- -wages and consequential benefits. In my view, the denial is just and proper. The reason is apparent. The captioned Writ Petition relates only to the denial of backwages. The law is well settled that neither reinstatement nor payment of backwages as such is a common law right. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5051 WP No. 106918 of 2023 These reliefs can, however, be granted by the Industrial Tribunals in the course of industrial adjudication. There cannot be a straight jacket formula for awarding relief of back wages. The relevant considerations will be taken note of. Furthermore, it would be a motion addressed to the discretion of the Labor Court or a Tribunal. Full back wages are the normal rule and the party objecting to it must establish the circumstances necessitating departure. The Labor Court or the Tribunal will exercise its discretion keeping given all the relevant circumstances. However, the discretion must be exercised judicially and judiciously. In the present case, the workman remained absent from duty unauthorizedly for 361 days. He was dismissed from service in 2007 itself. Taking note of the material on record, the Labor Court directed the Corporation to pay only the retirement benefits and declined to award the back wages and consequential benefits. In my view, the denial is just and proper. The Labor Court has exercised the discretionary powers from the right perspective. The Writ Petition is devoid of merits and the same is liable to be dismissed. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5051 WP No. 106918 of 2023 6. Resultantly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE MRP LIST NO.: 2 SL NO.: 59