- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2420 WP No. 19760 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO. 19760 OF 2013 (L-KSRTC) BETWEEN: KARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, TUMKUR DIVISION, TUMKUR, BY ITS DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, REP. BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFICER. …PETITIONER (BY SMT H R RENUKA.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. K R RAGHAVARAJU S/O RANGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, SINCE DECEASED REP. BY HIS LRS R(i) PREMA, W/O LATE K R RAGHAVARAJU, ADULT, NO.726, 10TH MAIN, D BLOCK, J P NAGAR, MYSORE - 570031. R(ii) NAVEEN KUMAR K R, S/O LATE K R RAGHAVARAJU, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, 283, 22ND CROSS, 20TH MAIN NEAR POLICE BOOTH, D BLOCK, J P NAGAR, MYSORE - 570031. R(iii) SWAPNA, W/O LATE K R RAGHAVARAJU, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, R/O NO.111, 2ND MAIN, 2ND CROSS, SRIRAMPURA 2ND STAGE, MYSORE - 570023. Digitally signed by PRAMILA G V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2420 WP No. 19760 of 2013 R(iv) SOWJANYA K R, D/O LATE K R RAGHAVARAJU, ADULT, C/O T P MANJUNATHA, 1730/1, 2ND CROSS, K R MOHALLA, MYSORE, LAKSHMIPURA, MYSORE - 570003. (AMENDED VIDE ORDER DATED 07.01.2026) …RESPONDENTS (V/O/DT 08.10.2025, NOTICE TO R1 (i to iv) IS H/S R1(iv) IS SERVED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE AWARD OF THE PRINCIPAL LABOUR COURT, BANGALORE DATED 29.6.12 IN REF NO.13/10 VIDE ANNX-H. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE ORAL ORDER Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Respondents though served have not appeared. 2. This petition is filed assailing the award dated 29.06.2012 in Reference No.13/2010 on the file of Principal Labour Court at Bengaluru. In terms of the impugned award, the claim petition under Section 10(1)(c) & (d) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ('ID Act') is allowed and order of dismissal dated 02.08.2003 is set aside. The order of - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2420 WP No. 19760 of 2013 reinstatement is not passed as respondent/workman had attained the age of superannuation by the time the award was passed and the Court granted continuity of service till the date of superannuation for the purposes of terminal benefits. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would urge that the Labour Court having recorded a finding that the petitioner is guilty of the misconduct could not have awarded the consequential benefit in favour of the respondent who had attained the age of superannuation. It is also submitted that the petitioner was dismissed from service in the year 2003 and he filed an appeal in the year 2010 and appeal was dismissed in the year 2012 and the dispute was raised in the year 2013 and there is inordinate delay on the part of the respondent to raise the dispute and having recorded a finding that the respondent is guilty of charges, the Court could not have held that the charges are minor. 4. It is submitted that the charge relating to not punching the tickets and charge relating to not accounting for - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2420 WP No. 19760 of 2013 the money collected were very much established as necessary entries are not in the log sheet and the way bills were not filled before the bus reached the next stage after the tickets were issued to the passengers. It is urged that the petitioner/Corporation has also established that there are 13 past misconducts proved against the original respondent/employee and in the domestic enquiry conducted, 14 charges were framed against respondent/employee and all the 14 charges were established. Since the respondent/employee was not able to establish that the charges are false as contended by him and since the Tribunal also recorded a finding that the charges were proved, it could not have exercised its discretion under Section 11(A) to award lesser penalty. 5. There is no representation on behalf of the respondents though the respondents are served. 6. The Court has considered the contentions raised at the Bar and perused the records. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2420 WP No. 19760 of 2013 7. It is noticed that the original respondent was dismissed from service in 2003. He filed an appeal against the order of dismissal. Appeal is also dismissed. The dispute was raised only in the year 2010. Thus, there is a delay and laches on the part of the respondents. However, ignoring the said technicality, the petition is considered on merits. 8. The evidence was led before the Labour Court. The Labour Court has recorded a finding that the respondent has not made entries in the log register. It has also recorded a finding that the punches are not properly made on the tickets issued. These facts would indicate that the respondent has misconducted himself and acted contrary to the rules and regulations applicable to the respondent in connection with his employment. Thus, the Labor Court could not have exercised the discretion under Section 11(A) of the Act, 1947. 9. Apart from that, it is also noticed that there were 13 other proved charges against the respondent earlier in the domestic inquiries. This being the position, the Court could - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2420 WP No. 19760 of 2013 not have exercised the discretion under Section 11(A) of the Act, 1947 given the fact that the 14 charges against the respondent are duly established by adducing the evidence. Under these circumstances, the Court is of the view that impugned award has to be set aside. 10. Hence the following: ORDER (i) Petition is allowed. (ii) Impugned award dated 29.06.2012 in Reference No.13/2010 passed by the Principal Labour Court, Bengaluru is set aside. (iii) Consequently, the claim petition before the Labour Court is rejected. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE CHS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24