- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45706 WP No. 25110 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI M WRIT PETITION NO. 25110 OF 2017 (L-RES) BETWEEN: KARNATAKA FOREST DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., SUBRAMANYA RUBBER DIVISION, CHIKKAMUDANUR POST, PUTTUR TALUK, DAKSHINA KANANDA, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER. …PETITIONER (BY SRI.MURUGESH V.CHARATI., ADVOCATE) AND: KARNATAKA PLANTATION STAFF & GENERAL EMPLOYEES UNION, AZAD ROAD, SAKALESHPURA - 573 134, HASSAN DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI.RAKSHITH R.SHETTY., ADVOCATE FOR SRI.M.SUBRAHMANYA BHAT., ADVOCATE) 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 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: Digitally signed by THEJAS KUMAR N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45706 WP No. 25110 of 2017 ORAL ORDER Sri.Murugesh V.Charati., counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Rakshith R.Shetty., counsel on behalf of Sri.M.Subrahmanya Bhat., for the respondent have appeared in person. 2. The order dated 26.04.2017 passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Mysuru on preliminary issue Nos.1 and 2 in Reference No.86/2013 vide Annexure-H is called into question in this Writ Petition on several grounds as setout in the Memorandum of Writ Petition. 3. Counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions. Heard, the arguments and perused the Writ papers with care. 4. Suffice it to note that the petitioner has questioned the order passed by the Industrial Tribunal on preliminary issues. The issue relates to the interference of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, in so far as - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45706 WP No. 25110 of 2017 the finding recorded by the Industrial Tribunal on preliminary issues. The Hon'ble Apex Court in D.P.MAHESHWARI V/S. DELHI ADMINISTRATION AND OTHERS reported in (1983) 4 SCC 293 has held that High Court is not required to be astute to interfere with the exercise of jurisdiction by Special Tribunals at interlocutory stages and on preliminary issue. Hence, I decline to exercise power under Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India to interfere with the order passed on preliminary issue. This Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of case. All the contentions of the parties are kept open. 5. Resultantly, the Writ Petition is rejected. Because of rejection of Writ Petition, pending interlocutory applications if any are disposed of and interim direction if any stands discharged. Sd/- (JYOTI M) JUDGE MRP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20