- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29528 WP No. 690 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI M WRIT PETITION NO. 690 OF 2019 (L-KSRTC) BETWEEN: SHAFIULLA KHAN, S/O. K.RAHIM KHAN, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/AT 401, EWS HANUMANTHNAGAR, MYSORE-570015. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHEKAR L., ADVOCATE) AND: THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, K.S.R.T.C., MYSORE URBAN DIVISION, MYSORE-570001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. R.B.ANEPPANAVAR, 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 IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29528 WP No. 690 of 2019 ORAL ORDER Sri.Shekar.L., counsel for the petitioner and Sri.R.B.Aneppanavar, counsel for the respondent, have appeared in person. 2. The short facts are these: The petitioner was working as a driver in the establishment of the Corporation. On the alleged unauthorised absence from 02.12.2015 to 04.03.2016, an Article of Charge was issued to the petitioner. The disciplinary authority appointed an inquiry officer. The inquiry officer conducted a detailed inquiry and submitted findings holding that the charges are proved, and the petitioner was dismissed from service on 10.12.2016. Aggrieved by the same, he raised a dispute before the Labor Court in IID No.1/2017. The Labor Court held that the domestic inquiry conducted by the Corporation was fair and proper. The Labor Court vide award dated 05.06.2017 partly allowed the claim petition and modified the order of dismissal to one of termination, and also the petitioner is entitled to all - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29528 WP No. 690 of 2019 financial benefits which are allowable under the recruitment and service rules of the Corporation. Under these circumstances, this writ petition is filed on several grounds as set out in the Memorandum of Writ Petition. 3. Counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions. Counsel Sri.Shekar.L., in presenting his arguments vehemently contented that the Labor Court, having concluded that the order of punishment is highly disproportionate to the misconduct, ought to have directed reinstatement. Counsel, therefore, submits that the award is liable to be quashed. 4. Heard the arguments and perused the papers with care. 5. The point that requires consideration is whether the award of the Labor Court requires interference. 6. The facts are adequately stated and do not need repetition. It is enough to note that the petitioner faced disciplinary proceedings and was punished with dismissal from service. The main issue concerns unauthorized absence. The - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29528 WP No. 690 of 2019 charge against the petitioner was that he was absent without permission from duty from 02.12.2015 to 04.03.2016. 7. It is the specific contention of the Corporation that no leave application was submitted, even if it is submitted, that should be accompanied by a Medical Certificate if the leave is sought on health grounds. 8. An employee is under an obligation not to absent himself from work without good cause during the time at which he is required to be at work. Absence without leave is misconduct in industrial employment, warranting disciplinary punishment. No employee can claim leave of absence as a matter of right, and remaining absent without leave will constitute a violation of discipline. The absence without leave constitutes misconduct justifying disciplinary action against the delinquent workman. The quantum of punishment in cases of misconduct or absence from duty without leave would depend upon the facts of each case. 9. This Court finds that although the petitioner sought to justify his absence by asserting ill health and producing medical documents before the Labour Court, such documents - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29528 WP No. 690 of 2019 are irrelevant to the period of absence in question. It is further held that the medical certificate, being unaccompanied by the requisite clinical prescription, cannot be accorded with evidentiary value. It is pertinent to note that upon a proper appreciation of the material on record, the Labor Court rightly rejected the claim for reinstatement. In my view, the findings of the Labor Court is just and proper. 10. Accordingly, the writ petition is rejected. Because of the rejection of the Writ Petition, pending interlocutory applications, if any, are disposed of, and interim relief, if any, stands discharged. SD/- (JYOTI M) JUDGE MRP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21