- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4620 WP No. 13106 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO. 13106 OF 2022 (L-KSRTC) BETWEEN: SRI NAGYANAIKA, S/O LT BHIMLANIKA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS R/AT BAVIKERE AT AND POST, TARIKERE TALUK 577157, CHICKMAGALURU DISTRICT. …PETITIONER (BY SRI GOPAL V BILALMANE, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE CHIEF MANAGER (M AND PC) APPELLATE AUTHORITY, KSRTC, CENTRAL OFFICES, K H ROAD, SHANTHINGAR, BENGALURU - 560027. 2. THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER/ DISCIPLIANRY AUTHORITY, KSRTC, CHICKMAGALURU DIVISON, CHICKMAGALURU - 577101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT RENUKA H R, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS FROM THE OFFICE OF THE RESPONDENTS IN ENQUIRY PROCEEDINGS DTD 20.06.2014, NO.KST/CKM/DISB/239/11/1850 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENTS AND AS WELL AS THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY ORDER NO. KAS/COM AND PC/537/500/2014-15 DTD 30.01.2015 AND ALSO ORDER PASSED BY THE LABOUR Digitally signed by PRAMILA G V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4620 WP No. 13106 of 2022 COURT, CHIKMAGALUR DTD 11.10.2018 IN I.D.A.NO.06/2015 AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE ORAL ORDER This petition is filed assailing the award dated 11.10.2018 in I.D.A. No.06/2015 passed by the Labour Court, Chickmagalur. In terms of the impugned award, the petitioner's claim is rejected. The petitioner has assailed the order of termination dated 30.01.2015 passed by the Appellate Authority, which in fact, confirmed the order of dismissal dated 20.06.2014 passed by the disciplinary authority. 2. The petitioner joined the employment of the respondent in the year 1990 as a driver. The probation was declared and in the year 2014. Disciplinary enquiry was initiated against the petitioner on the allegation that he has produced fake certificate while securing the employment. The petitioner denied the charges and the enquiry officer found - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4620 WP No. 13106 of 2022 that the certificate produced by the petitioner relating to his educational qualification was fake and proposed penalty of dismissal. The disciplinary authority accepted the finding and imposed the penalty of dismissal after following the procedure. Said order is called in question by filing an appeal before the Appellate Authority. Appellate Authority dismissed the appeal and thereafter, the dispute was raised before the Labour Court. 3. The Labour Court recorded a finding that the enquiry was not fair and proper and the parties were permitted to lead evidence relating to the charges of misconduct alleged against the petitioner. Both parties led evidence in support of their respective contentions. The Labour Court found that the petitioner produced the fake certificate and was not eligible to apply for the post and accordingly, rejected the claim petition and thereby, the order of termination is confirmed. 4. Aggrieved by the aforementioned award and the orders referred to above, the petitioner is before this Court. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4620 WP No. 13106 of 2022 Learned counsel for the petitioner would urge that the petitioner joined service in the year 1990. Thereafter, his services were declared to be satisfactory on completing probation and he was made the permanent employee of the Corporation. Thereafter, petitioner was diligently discharging the duty as a driver of the Corporation and he has also secured an award for being the best driver recognizing his efficiency and punctuality. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would also urge that though the petitioner joined the employment in 1990, the domestic enquiry was held in 2014 and such a belated enquiry is not permissible. The respondent/Corporation having extracted the work from the petitioner for 24 years could not have initiated the domestic enquiry on the premise that he did not possess the requisite educational qualification. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner would also refer to the circular issued by the respondent/Corporation marked at Annexure-WW1. The said circular dated 15.02.1996 issued by the Chairman and Managing Director of the Corporation - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4620 WP No. 13106 of 2022 and said circular is addressed to the heads of the department in the Central Office, Bengaluru and all the Senior Divisional Controllers, Work Managers of the KSRTC and in terms of the said circular, the officials of the KSRTC were cautioned and informed to verify the credentials of the employees who seek employment. And it was also brought to the notice of the officials that several persons are seeking employment based on fake certificates. 7. Referring to the said circular, learned counsel for the petitioner would urge that though the circular was issued in 1996, the action was initiated in 2014 and action itself is belated and the Corporation could not have initiated the action after having extracted work for 24 years. 8. In addition, the learned counsel for the petitioner would also refer to the judgment of the Apex Court in K.V.S. Ram vs. Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation1 and would urge that the penalty of dismissal from service is disproportionate to the misconduct alleged and 1 (2015) 12 SCC 39 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4620 WP No. 13106 of 2022 in similar circumstances, a lesser penalty is imposed on the employees of the Corporation and would urge under the principle of parity, the order of dismissal from service is untenable. 9. Learned counsel for the respondent/Corporation would urge that the charges are proved. The petitioner did not possess the qualification for the post of the driver and secured employment based on the fake certificate. And when it was brought to the notice of the Corporation in 2014, the Corporation could not have kept quiet on the premise that the petitioner has joined the service in the year 1990 and it is too late in the day to initiate the domestic enquiry. 10. Having noticed that the petitioner has obtained the employment based on a fake certificate, the Corporation has rightly initiated the domestic enquiry and in the enquiry, it was found that the petitioner did not possess the qualification and he secured employment based on a fake certificate. Thus, the enquiry officer has reported to the disciplinary authority and disciplinary authority after following the procedure has - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4620 WP No. 13106 of 2022 imposed the penalty of dismissal from service which is proportionate to the misconduct proved. It is also urged on behalf of the respondent/Corporation that the Appellate Authority has considered the materials on record and has rightly dismissed the petitioner's appeal. 11. Learned counsel for the respondent/Corporation would further urge that though the Labor Court recorded a finding that the inquiry was not fair and proper, the opportunity was given to the parties to lead evidence to substantiate their respective contentions and before the Labor Court the evidence was led and from the evidence placed before the Labor Court the finding is recorded that the petitioner did not possess the educational qualification to apply for the post of the driver and accordingly, the claim petition is rightly rejected. 12. In support of the contention that the persons who secure employment based on the fake certificate should not be shown any leniency, learned counsel for the respondent would also place reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4620 WP No. 13106 of 2022 in Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. vs. Rajendra D. Harmalkar2. 13. Refuting the contentions based on the judgment of K.V.S. Ram, (supra), learned counsel for the respondent could place reliance on the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in Sri Krishna S/o Muniyappa vs Bengaluru Metropolitan Transport Corporation3 and Nehamathulla Sharief vs. Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation4. 14. The Court has considered the contentions raised at the Bar and perused the records. 15. From the records placed before the Court, it is evident that the petitioner did not possess the qualification when he applied for the post of the driver. He secured employment based on a fake certificate. Merely because the petitioner has worked for 24 years and merely because he has bagged a medal for having discharged duties efficiently, 2 AIR Online 2022 SC 580 3 Writ Appeal No.94/2015 4 Writ Appeal No.176/2025 - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4620 WP No. 13106 of 2022 that cannot be the basis to hold that the employment secured based on a fake certificate has to be protected. What is required to be seen is that the petitioner was not eligible to apply for the post at all. Probably, that post belonged to some other person who did possess the qualification and by applying to the said post, based on a fake certificate the petitioner has deprived the employment which is due to another person. 16. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that the action is initiated belatedly in 2014, though the petitioner was employed in 1990 and though there was a circular in 1996 cautioning the officials of the KSRTC to verify the credentials of the candidates who apply for the post, it is to be noticed that inaction on the part of the officials has not caused any prejudice to the petitioner, in the sense, the petitioner continued to work in the Corporation till he was removed from service in the year 2015 and till then, his salary is paid. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4620 WP No. 13106 of 2022 17. It is indeed true that the other consequential benefits like gratuity and any other consequential benefit would not be available to the petitioner. But at the same time, it is to be borne in mind that the petitioner has secured employment based on a fake certificate and he was not eligible to apply for the post. Under these circumstances, the contention that the action is initiated belatedly does not come to the aid of the petitioner. 18. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner would place reliance on the judgment of K.V.S. Ram referred to supra, the division Bench of this Court in Sri Krishna and Nehamathulla Sharief (supra) have distinguished the judgment of K.V.S. Ram. In the K.V.S. Ram (supra), the domestic enquiry continued for 22 years after initiation. However, that is not the case here. The domestic enquiry was initiated in 2010. In the instant case, the charge sheet was initiated in 2011 and the inquiry was concluded in 2014 and he was dismissed from service in 2014. - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4620 WP No. 13106 of 2022 19. For the aforementioned reasons, this Court is of the view that no case is made out. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the amputation he has suffered in an accident in the year 2024. Under these circumstances, the petitioner is given liberty to make a representation to the respondent/Corporation to consider his claim relating to payment of some monetary benefits. If so done, is for the respondent/Corporation to consider the same in accordance with any provisions applicable to the Corporation. The petition is dismissed. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE CHS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11