- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45218-DB WA No. 703 of 2025 C/W WA No. 793 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU WRIT APPEAL NO. 703 OF 2025 (L-KSRTC) C/W WRIT APPEAL NO. 793 OF 2025 (L-KSRTC) IN WA No. 703/2025: BETWEEN: 1. SYED AKBAR S/O SYED KHAN, AGE 59 YEARS, R/AT C/O R.BABU, VEGETABLE MERCHANT, NEW MARKET, ANDERSONPET, K.G.F., KOLAR DISTRICT. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SHEKAR L., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER K.S.R.T.C. KOLAR DIVISION KOLAR. 582201 …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. RENUKA H.R., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by VASANTHA KUMARY B K Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45218-DB WA No. 703 of 2025 C/W WA No. 793 of 2025 THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 26.11.2024 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WP No-8523/2018 TO THE EXTENT OF RESTRICTING THE BACK WAGES TO THE EXTENT OF 50 PERCENT FROM THE DATE OF THE DISMISSAL, TILL THE DATE OF REINSTATEMENT CONSEQUENTLY DIRECTED THE RESPONDENT TO PAY FULL BACK WAGES AND ALL THE CONSEQUENTIAL BENEFITS INCLUDING REINSTATEMENT, ETC. IN WA NO. 793/2025: BETWEEN: 1. THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER K.S.R.T.C KOLAR DIVISION KOLAR-582101 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER ...APPELLANT (BY SRI. RENUKA H.R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SYED AKBAR S/O SYED KHAN AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS R/O C/O BABU VEGETABLE MERCHANT NEW MARKET ANDERSONPET, KGF KOLAR DISTRICT 563113 ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI. SHEKAR L., ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE DATED 26/11/2024 PASSED IN WP NO.8523/2018, CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE WRIT PETITION. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45218-DB WA No. 703 of 2025 C/W WA No. 793 of 2025 THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH) The appellant-workman, who was working as a Driver with the respondent/Corporation has filed W.A.No.703/2025 impugning the judgment and order dated 26.11.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.8523/2018(L-KSRTC) instituted by the petitioner against the Award dated 30.07.2016 passed in I.D.No.82/2013 by the II Additional Labour Court, Bangalore. 2. The appellant-Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (for short 'the Corporation') has filed W.A.No.793/2025 praying to set aside the order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.8523/2018. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45218-DB WA No. 703 of 2025 C/W WA No. 793 of 2025 3. The parties are referred to as per their rankings before the learned Single Judge. 4. The petitioner was dismissed from service after conclusion of the departmental proceedings against him on 22.01.2013. The petitioner had caused a fatal injury. As a result thereof, one person had died and some others received injuries. 5. Smt. Renuka, learned counsel appearing for the Corporation submits that it was the fourth accident by the petitioner and his guilt was established during the departmental proceedings and thereafter, the competent authority had imposed the punishment of dismissal from service vide order dated 22.01.2013. Learned counsel further submits that considering the nature of allegation, the Labour Court found that the order of dismissal unsustainable but did not grant any back wages. The Corporation therefore, did not challenge the order of the Labour Court and implemented the award dated 30.07.2016 and the petitioner was taken back in service. Two years after the date of the award, the petitioner had filed the writ petition and the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45218-DB WA No. 703 of 2025 C/W WA No. 793 of 2025 Writ Court has granted 50% back wages for the period from the date of dismissal till the date of reinstatement. 6. Heard learned counsel appearing for both the parties. 7. A workman cannot claim back wages as a matter of right. If the order of dismissal is set aside, it depends on the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegations, the departmental enquiry and the punishment imposed. The Labour Court in exercise of discretion did not grant any back wages, but the learned Single Judge has granted 50% of the back wages. Once the Labour Court has found the order of dismissal unsustainable, some back wages were required to have been granted. However, the Labour court chose not to grant any back wages. The learned Single Judge considering the aforesaid facts and law, has granted 50% of the back wages. We are of the opinion that grant of back wages is not unjustified. The petitioner cannot claim 100% back wages as he has not led any evidence to show that he was unemployed during this period. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45218-DB WA No. 703 of 2025 C/W WA No. 793 of 2025 8. Considering the aforesaid fact, we are of the opinion that grant of 50% of the back wages to the petitioner is neither excessive nor bad in law and therefore, we dismiss both the writ appeals. 9. We are also of the opinion that the petitioner did not prove that he was not gainfully employed nor the Corporation led any evidence to prove that petitioner was gainfully employed. Therefore, grant of 50% back wages is justified. As directed by the learned Single Judge 50% back wages are to be paid within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 10. In view of dismissal of the appeal, pending interim applications if any, stand disposed of. Sd/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE Sd/- (TARA VITASTA GANJU) JUDGE NG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2