- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30589 WP No. 331 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR WRIT PETITION NO. 331 OF 2025 (S-KSRTC) BETWEEN: SRI H.C.BASAVARAJAPPA, S/O LATE T. CHANDRASHEKARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, RETIRED AS WORKS MANAGER, CENTRAL WORKSHOP, BANGALORE METROPOLITAN TARNSPORT CORPORATION, SHANTHINAGAR, BHANGALORE, R/O NO.82, 3RD MAIN, 3RD CROSS, RAMAKRISHNAGAR, NANDINI LAYOUT, 4TH BLOCK, BANGALORE - 560 096. …PETITIONER (BY SRI H.C.BASAVARAJAPPA, PARTY-IN-PERSON) AND: 1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, CENTRAL OFFICE, SHANTI NAGARA, BANGALORE - 560 027. 2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, BANGALORE METRO ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, CENTRAL OFFICE, SHANTI NAGARA, BANGALORE - 560027. Digitally signed by GAVRIBIDANUR SUBRAMANYA GUPTA SREENATH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30589 WP No. 331 of 2025 3. THE CHIEF PERSONNEL MANAHGER, BANGALORE METRO ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, CENTRAL OFFICE, SHANTI NAGARA, BANGALORE - 560 027. 4. THE CHIEF PERSONNEL MANAGER, KARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, CENTRAL OFFICE, SHANTI NAGARA, BANGALORE - 560 027. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI RENUKA H.R., ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE PUNISHMENT ORDER BEARING ORDER NO.KST/ CO/DISC/D3/D-2029/981/2022-23 DATED 31/01/2023 AS PER ANNEXURE-E, ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR ORAL ORDER This petition is filed by the petitioner-workman, who was appointed in the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation in the year 1988 and he continued his employment even after the formation of the Bengaluru Metropolitan Transportation Corporation (for short, 'BMTC'), NWKRTC, KKRTC, which are independent Corporations of the State of Karnataka. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30589 WP No. 331 of 2025 2. The petitioner/party-in-person was serving in Central Works Shop, BMTC, Shanthinagar, Bengaluru since 11.12.2019 as Works Manager. The processed Bus Body Repair man-hour bills pertaining to the Sree Coach Bus Body repairers were submitted in the month of September 2022 for Rs.24,22,250/- for repair of 92 buses for 60031 man-hours of work, recommending payments to the CME Office, BMTC. The file was scrutinised and submitted to the Management/CME Central Office, BMTC for further processing and approval of the payment of bills. This being the state of affairs, respondent No.2 issued articles of charges to the petitioner-workman working under deputation, alleging excess billing of man-hours. 3. It is the contention of Sri H.C.Basavarajappa/ party-in-person, who is present physically before the Court that, there are no rules in operation to initiate disciplinary proceedings upon the petitioner. Therefore, the initiation of disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner is illegal and mala fide. He also contends that charges framed - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30589 WP No. 331 of 2025 against him are false and frivolous and have been made with a mala fide intention to tarnish the image of the petitioner. 4. It is further contended by the petitioner/party-in- person that he has already filed an appeal under Regulation 30 of the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation Servants (Conduct and Discipline) Regulations, 1971, which is pending adjudication. It is the grievance of the petitioner that in the said appeal, he has not narrated certain additional facts and grounds that are urged by the petitioner before this Court in this writ petition. Therefore, consideration of the appeal would not deal with a complete process of facts and question of law that the petitioner wants to put forth and argue before the Appellate Authority. Hence, he seeks leave of this Court to direct the Appellate Authority to consider the contentions and grounds urged before this Court in this petition to be taken up for consideration before the Appellate Authority. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30589 WP No. 331 of 2025 5. Per contra, Smt.H.R.Renuka, learned counsel for respondent-KSRTC contends that the petition being filed by the petitioner/party-in-person is not in conformity with the regulation format, as several points are urged that do not seem to be in proper understanding. Therefore, she contends that if the petitioner formulate points for consideration before the Appellant Authority, it would be easy to consider and address his grievance and points. 6. I have heard the submissions and contentions made by the petitioner/party-in-person, which has some force and there may not be any legal impediment for the Appellate Authority to consider the contentions and the grounds urged before this Court in this petition while considering the appeal, which is pending before it and pass a suitable orders in accordance with law. 7. I am in agreement with the learned counsel for the respondent as well, so also with the contentions put forth by the petitioner. The petitioner shall formulate the points for consideration to be considered by the Appellate - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30589 WP No. 331 of 2025 Authority, including facts and legal grounds that he wants to urge. The same may be placed before the Appellate Authority. In turn, the Appellate Authority shall consider the same and pass orders in accordance with law. 8. The petitioner shall file points for consideration within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 9. The respondent-KSRTC shall consider the appeal filed by the petitioner along with points for consideration that would be filed in the ensuing Board Meeting and pass suitable orders. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed off. Sd/- (PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE CPN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2