- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13982 WP No. 7508 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 7508 OF 2026 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN: 1. AKHANDA KARNATAKA RAJYA RASTHE, SARIGE KARMIKA MAHA MANDALI (R) (AFFILIATED TO INTUC) OFFICE AT NO.48, 4TH CROSS, ANUBHAVA NAGARA, BANGALORE - 560 072. REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY SRI. A.V. BORASHETTY. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. M.C. BASAVARAJU, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KSRTC, CENTRAL OFFICE, K.H. ROAD, SHANTHI NAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 027. 2. THE POLICE SUB INSPECTOR/ STATION OFFICER, WILSON GARDEN POLICE STATION, WILSON GARDEN, BANGALORE - 560 027. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K.P. YOGANNA, AGA FOR R2) Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13982 WP No. 7508 of 2026 THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO i) QUASH THE IMPUGNED POLICE NOTICE BEARING NO. G2/PS/NOO/03/2026 DATED 26/02/2026 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT VIDE ANNX-D TO THE WP AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER The captioned petition is filed seeking the following reliefs: i. Issue a writ in the nature of writ of cercerari by quashing the impugned police notice bearing No.G2/PS/NOO/03/2026 dated 26/02/2026 issued by the second respondent vide Annexure-D to the writ petition and ii. Issue a writ in the nature of writ of mandamus directing the second respondent to permit the petitioner union to arrange the strike at the premises of first respondent at KSRTC, Central offices, Shanthinagar, Bangalore under the facts and circumstances of the case and iii. Pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit to grant under the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13982 WP No. 7508 of 2026 2. Facts leading to the case are as under: The petitioner claims to be a Trade Union registered under the provisions of the Trade Unions Act, 1926. The petitioner–Union asserts that certain demands have been raised by the workers employed under the first respondent–Corporation. The said demands are stated to relate, inter alia, to implementation of the Seventh Pay Scale, alleged non-payment or withholding of salary for a period of 38 months, deduction of salary of employees who were dismissed during the years 2020–2021, and other service-related grievances. It is the specific contention of the petitioner–Union that despite submitting several representations to the first respondent requesting consideration of the aforesaid demands, no positive response has been forthcoming. 3. In that background, the petitioner–Union claims that it was constrained to resort to a strike in order to ventilate and press for the redressal of the said demands. Accordingly, the petitioner–Union submitted a - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13982 WP No. 7508 of 2026 representation seeking permission to organize a strike and demonstration before the premises of the first respondent at KSRTC Central Office, Shanthinagar. However, when the petitioner approached the jurisdictional police authorities seeking permission to conduct such strike within the premises of the employer, the second respondent, by the impugned police notice bearing No.G2/PS/NOO/03/2026 dated 26.02.2026 produced at Annexure-D, declined to grant permission. Aggrieved by the said endorsement issued by the police authorities, the petitioner–Union has approached this Court seeking quashing of the said notice and consequently a direction permitting the Union to conduct a strike and demonstration within the premises of the first respondent–Corporation. 4. A perusal of the impugned police notice at Annexure-D clearly indicates that the decision of the police authorities is in consonance with the directions issued by this Court in W.P.No.5781/2021 and connected matters. This Court, while considering the competing rights of - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13982 WP No. 7508 of 2026 citizens to protest and the necessity of maintaining public order and administrative functioning, has issued specific guidelines regulating the manner and place where protests, demonstrations and strikes are to be conducted within the city. In terms of the said directions, a designated public place has been earmarked for holding protests and demonstrations so as to ensure that the fundamental right to assemble peacefully is exercised in a regulated manner without disrupting public order, administrative functioning, or the working of public institutions. In the light of the said directions, the police authorities have taken the view that any protest, demonstration or strike intended to ventilate grievances must necessarily be conducted at the designated protest location, namely Freedom Park. 5. It is in this background that the request of the petitioner–Union to hold a strike within the premises of the first respondent–Corporation has been declined. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13982 WP No. 7508 of 2026 6. On a careful consideration of the material placed on record, this Court is of the view that the impugned police notice does not suffer from any illegality, arbitrariness or violation of the guidelines issued by this Court. While a Trade Union or its members may have a right to raise their grievances and to organize peaceful protests, such rights are not absolute or unregulated. The right to protest or go on strike must necessarily be exercised in conformity with the regulatory framework prescribed by law and in compliance with the directions issued by this Court in the interest of maintaining public order and administrative discipline. The petitioner–Union cannot claim, as a matter of right, permission to hold a strike or demonstration within the premises of the employer or at the place of work, particularly when this Court has specifically directed that protests and demonstrations shall be conducted only at the designated location earmarked for such activities. Permitting demonstrations within the employer’s premises would not - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13982 WP No. 7508 of 2026 only run contrary to the regulatory framework laid down by this Court but may also disrupt the functioning of the establishment and affect public administration. 7. In that view of the matter, this Court does not find any infirmity in the impugned notice issued by the police authorities declining permission to conduct the strike within the premises of the first respondent. The endorsement issued by the second respondent is fully in consonance with the directions issued by this Court regulating protests and demonstrations. Consequently, the writ petition is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed. However, it is made clear that this order will not preclude the petitioner–Union from ventilating its grievances and pursuing its demands by organizing a peaceful protest at the designated protest site, namely Freedom Park, in accordance with law and subject to obtaining necessary permission from the competent authorities. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13982 WP No. 7508 of 2026 With these observations, the writ petition is devoid of merits and accordingly, stands dismissed. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE HDK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26