- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31420 WP No. 18493 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI M WRIT PETITION NO. 18493 OF 2024 (L-KSRTC) BETWEEN: 1. DAKSHAYANAMMA, W/O. LATE G.E.RAVIKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, 2. MASTER DIGANTH G.R., S/O. LATE G.E.RAVIKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 9 YEARS, 3. KUMARI HAMSA G.R., D/O. LATE G.E.RAVIKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 6 YEARS, ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO.26, NEAR DURGAMBIKA TEMPLE, PAVADARANGAVVANAHALLI, ANAJI POST, DAVANGERE TALUK AND DISTRICT-577512. (SINCE PETITIONER NOS.2 AND 3 ARE MINORS THEY ARE REPRESENTED BY THEIR NATURAL GUARDIAN AND MOTHER I.E., FIRST PETITIONER) …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. M.C.BASAVARAJU, ADVOCATE) AND: THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER AND DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY, K.S.R.T.C., Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31420 WP No. 18493 of 2024 CHIKKAMAGALURU DIVISION, CHIKKAMAGALURU-577101. …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. RENUKA H.R., 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: ORAL ORDER Sri.M.C.Basavaraju, counsel for the petitioners and Smt.H.R.Renuka, counsel for the respondent, have appeared in person. 2. The short facts are these: The deceased Sri.G.E.Ravikumar was working as a Driver Cum Conductor in the establishment of the Corporation. He came under disciplinary proceedings for an act of misconduct, unauthorised absence from 26.12.2015 to 22.03.2016, and 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 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31420 WP No. 18493 of 2024 that the charges are proved, and the petitioner was dismissed from service on 05.05.2017. Aggrieved by the same, he raised a dispute before the Labor Court in I.D.A.No.11/2017. The Labor Court held that the domestic inquiry conducted by the Corporation was fair and proper. The Labor Court vide award dated 30.10.2018 dismissed the claim application. 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. Heard the arguments and perused the papers with care. 4. The point that requires consideration is whether the award of the Labor Court requires interference. 5. The facts are adequately stated and do not need repetition. It is enough to note that the workman faced disciplinary proceedings and was punished with dismissal from service. The main issue concerns unauthorized absence. The - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31420 WP No. 18493 of 2024 charge against the workman was that he was absent without permission from duty from 26.12.2015 to 22.03.2016. 6. 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. 7. 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. 8. This Court finds that although the workman sought to justify his absence by asserting ill health, however, he did - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31420 WP No. 18493 of 2024 not entered into the witness box and gave evidence before the Labor Court. It is pertinent to note that upon a proper appreciation of the material on record, the Labor Court rightly dismissed the claim of the workman. In my view, the findings of the Labor Court are just and proper. 9. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Because of the dismissal of the Writ Petition, pending interlocutory applications, if any, are disposed of, and interim relief, if any, stands discharged. SD/- (JYOTI M) JUDGE SS/MRP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 58