- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010066932024 NC: 2026:KHC:44570 WP No. 4095 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI M WRIT PETITION NO. 4095 OF 2024 (L-RES) BETWEEN: DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER BMTC, CENTRAL DIVISION, BMTC CENTRAL OFFICE, K.H. ROAD, SHANTHINAGARA, BENGALURU-560027, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER, BMTC, CENTRAL OFFICE, K.H. ROAD,SHANTHINAGARA, BENGALURU-560 027. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. HAREESH BHANDARY T.,ADVOCATE) AND: SRI. PASAGI MALATHESH S/O. AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, CONDUCTOR, BMTC CENTRAL DIVISION, REPRESENTED BY PRESIDENT, KSRTC CENTRAL DIVISION, MAZDOOR SANGHA (R), BMS OFFICE, NO. 458, OTC ROAD, COTTONPETE, BENGALURU-560 053. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. H.K. NAGABHUSHAN ,ADVOCATE [ABSENT]) Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010066932024 NC: 2026:KHC:44570 WP No. 4095 of 2024 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. Hareesh Bhandary.T., counsel for the petitioner, appeared in person. When the matter was called, there is no representation on behalf of the respondent. As can be seen from the daily order sheet, the petition was listed on 29.07.2026 and 05.08.2026. On those days, at the request of counsel for the respondent, the matter was adjourned. As already noted above, there is no representation on behalf of the respondent. Hence, this Court deems it appropriate to pass orders on the merits of the case. 2. The short facts are as follows: The respondent was on duty as Driver Cum Conductor in vehicle No. FA-1508, plying on route No. 201/1, when - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010066932024 NC: 2026:KHC:44570 WP No. 4095 of 2024 intercepted by the checking squad on 29.01.2012. During the check, officers found that 24 adult passengers and 35 pass holders were travelling in the bus. On reaching Udupi Garden Stage-3, the respondent had not recorded the entries in the waybill for the sale of tickets and 20 pass holders were not taken into account. In this regard, an Articles of Charge was issued. The inquiry officer was appointed. The inquiry officer submitted a report holding that the charges were proved. The second show cause notice was issued. On 28.09.2013, the disciplinary authority passed the punishment order. He preferred an appeal before the Appellate Authority. The Appellate Authority modified the punishment order. As things stood, he raised a dispute before the Industrial Tribunal. The Tribunal held that the domestic inquiry conducted by the Corporation was not fair and proper. The Tribunal, vide award dated 15.03.2023, allowed the claim statement. Under these circumstances, the Corporation has filed the present writ petition on several grounds as set out in the memorandum of the writ petition. - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010066932024 NC: 2026:KHC:44570 WP No. 4095 of 2024 3. Counsel for the petitioner contended that the checking took place at the stage point. However, the respondent had failed to close the entry for the sale of tickets at the stage point. It is argued that the charge was that he failed to make the necessary entries, and before the inquiry officer he made no effort to prove his innocence. However, in cross-examination, he stated that the checking officials demanded a bribe of Rs.500/-; he refused to pay the same, and a false allegation was made against him. Urging additional contentions, counsel submits that the Tribunal's award may be set aside. 4. I have heard the arguments and perused the writ papers with utmost care. 5. The question for consideration is whether the award of the Tribunal warrants interference. 6. The facts are adequately presented and do not need to be repeated. It is undisputed that the respondent came under disciplinary proceedings for misconduct and was visited with an order of punishment. - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010066932024 NC: 2026:KHC:44570 WP No. 4095 of 2024 The allegation was that, despite reaching the stage point, he failed to make the necessary entries in the waybill. However, the workman attempted to justify his misconduct, alleging that the Corporation officials demanded a bribe. Since he refused to pay the bribe, a false allegation was levelled against him. This cannot be accepted. The reason is apparent. A perusal of the waybill marked Ex.M1 clearly shows that entries are not made. The Tribunal failed to appreciate the material evidence on record in the right perspective. If it had been viewed correctly, the Tribunal would not have forgiven the misconduct or overturned the punishment order. Furthermore, the Corporation initially punished by withholding three annual salary increments with cumulative effect and considered the suspension period as not on duty, denying any monetary benefits. However, the Appellate Authority revised this penalty, reducing it to two increments. Therefore, the Tribunal could not have interfered with the punishment order. Furthermore, the Tribunal's decision to set aside the minor penalty is entirely without jurisdiction. The Tribunal lacks the legal authority to interfere with a managerial - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010066932024 NC: 2026:KHC:44570 WP No. 4095 of 2024 decision to impose a minor punishment. Such disciplinary actions are absolute and beyond the Tribunal's modification, absent explicit proof of perversity or victimization. The Tribunal excused the misconduct on the ground that the Corporation failed to explain that it suffered a loss. However, this reasoning is flawed. The key question is whether the respondent performed his duties diligently. A Conductor's responsibilities include issuing tickets, collecting fares, and accounting for them. The employee failed to perform these duties diligently and honestly. The Tribunal overlooked this point. I believe the Tribunal could not have excused the misconduct. Based on the reasons given, the Tribunal's decision should be set aside. I may venture to say that the Tribunal has failed to have regard to relevant considerations and disregarded relevant matters. For the reasons stated above, the award passed by the Tribunal is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, it is set aside. 7. The writ of certiorari is ordered. The award of the Industrial Tribunal, Bengaluru dated 15.03.2023 in - 7 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010066932024 NC: 2026:KHC:44570 WP No. 4095 of 2024 I.D.No.178/2015 is quashed. The punishment order of the Appellate Authority is confirmed. 8. Resultantly, the writ petition is allowed. Because of the disposal 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.: 42