IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT
DATED was THE mm mm 01%' NOVEMBER
BEFORE
THE I-iON'BLE MR.Ji_iSI'ICE.A,S' "
WRIT mrmon NO. 3198lfl??%'%tL$xSR_"I'€'?:"
BETWEEN :
SR1 K P THIMMEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 5'vi)"Y__EE2S»'_,= N
3/0 LATE Ptrrrmewoka» 4 '
ASSISTANF_Ai?¥'£SAR.:§§$RTC RAM&.N.ATHPI}RA
DEPGT. R/0 U{){1IURU';VViLLAGE _
J01)! HA'ND:p:AxE:::3~V.PcsT,vAumaicunnamm
HASSAN 'I'A1£LIK AND'«D1S'i"R1c'-.!f,
PE'i'i'I'IONER
_ (By PYA;f'I','--A\II)_Y.H }.
THE 'i2_iVIfifé<i(I:!xf .?£:cNrRoLLER
yuzvisxotagz, omcs
"wfgESRTGf
% $3291.
RESPONDENT
~ 435.? Sri : H KARUNAKARAN. ADV. )
3|
THIS WRIT PE’I’I’I’iON IS FILED UNDER ARIYCLESA 1 ~
227 OF THE CONS’fi’I’U’i’ION OF izvznla. WITH A PRAY.I_«;i?. ‘i’*.’);» _
QUASH THE IMPUGNED AWARE) 01′. 16.3.2006 953339. B’! ‘f’HE.L. *
LABOUR couwr, CHIKKABQANGALORE, xnwpn’ :z;o..j24,I2ee4,
VIDE ANX—A. TO THE WRIT PE’Fi’I’i0N,_UHD§S;R ‘1’–!g{E..FA(Z;’i’ fA._N£’%_~
CIRCUMSTANCES or THE CASE; nnzscr mm REs:?oi~:m:N”:i 10 =
REINSTATE THE PE’I’I”I’lC)NER Vsmaxcx mro smvzaa wm-1*
commum or SERVICE AND A1.L._c7rHER_ CONSEQU’EN’i’IAL
B$NEF’I’i’S, XNCLUDING FULL BACK.uVJAGES’FRC}?ufi’ mm DATE
omazsmxssas…
This Writ Pttitian D1;?Vfb’I “‘fic:a3mV’:’ g, this day, the
Court made the following: ‘- 1 _
Tim “‘1ig as Assismm Artisan “m the
mspondentiem 3013. % 30.6.2002, the bus bcann’ g
_. No. cntrusnad to one Sri Domain
}£zv§j11t;;za1:1vtl3;a;;A{}iée2M,_whc: was dimhaxging his dufiaca as Driver-
Dn the said’ data, when the safi
-V Driv«;§i’~c1i§t;.-(’16-nduchor was engaged in issue offickcts tn the
H ‘A the petitioner’ herein who was in the sad’ bus is
have unauthozisedly driven the bus and caused
VT V’ atgticient at Hassan-Bmgakm: Road, nem* Buvmahally cross.
A. The said acxidcnt msultnd in the death of one person and
1
‘-
injury to 30 others. It is in that context, the mspondcnfhad
initiated disciplinary p1%dings against both V.
cum~C’onductor as well as the petitioner who’wae§«’:y:iro1f3c:i.:ti$ —
Asaistant Artisan since he was not-‘aiithtpljspd _:t’:’:aj»:
bus and in any event the
bus unauthorisedly and
2. In this regard, held and
on the that he is guilty of
the honicir dame} 3.3.2000 was
passed. had questioned the tiismmsai’
_ floxdc;’~;p3vr: ai:”‘a}3;;lis:ahTon under Section l0(4~Aj of the
to be registacred as I.D.A.No.24_IO4 in
H ” ‘A s The Labour Court, at the first hxatsmce, considered
écitfxectacas cu” otherwise of the domestic cnquiry and an
VT Ifcemzng to the oonciuaion that the am: was flair and valid
A’ had thematic: considered the matter on merits to End out as
J2
W
to whether there: was any perversity in the ‘
cnquizy oflicer and with regard to. {if ‘
punishment imposed by the Lax
Court thereafter by its
the punishmcrnt on “T.1C:Ivf 3A
thcmfiaxe is before: this _
4. for the parties, I
have the award
m;pugfié:! Icgani, the Labour Court
whflc xendézjzjgvv an Issue No.1 perta1nm’ ‘ g to
_ {he domastic enquiry had noticed the
through M.W.l and the documents which
_a:;3;:;’E3:hs.Ml to M42. The evidence tendered on
L o£:tne7peafioner as Wm was also noticed by the
” H u Thereafter, an 003511″ sting the matcnais’
been placed befone the Labour Court, the Labour
was of the View that the damask enquiry Wm
eanducfixi in a fmr mad pmpt-.1′ masmcr and 3}} opportunity
3
41
had been pmvzidccl to the petitioner. Subsequegfly,
opportunity was given to the first pmiy to Iced
The first party viz., the petitioner hetrcin
himself as wwx on merits and * u
Exhs.W1 and W2. Since the doa;:a¢s:5g:Tcén§;uj§y%
respondent herein had not tap further
evidence in this regard. V . 2
s. =._1:a* this 9;): Labour Court pmeeedcd in
assess , ‘gaawaiiéiblc cm rwozd to find out with
, ‘_ t’:Vp i;%l¢ the fnxclinfi Iendemd by the enquiry
a1VA_1ti.Vthi1V锑*s;1baeque11t acfimn taken by the disciplinary
Court whfle apptmciatiag this aspect
V -V of noticed that the Drivcr–cum–Oonductor who
{iuty on the safl date had ‘ himself in the
and had also smtcél with regmd to the fact that he
T V’ ‘Was engaged in issue of tickets to the passengers and it is at
” that juncture, the pcti er who was an Assistant Artism
had amen” the bus Ilnauthofisctily and had ~
amend’ ant. This smtement: was also srapgnztedé ”
6. The contention put forth oi; .’
stating that in fact he 1:;ad,gp_;1e
function of one of his ‘ §1e not
committed the in by the
Labour Court. While the
Labour finding with rcganzl
in the crf duty after about three days
and the Eaéitlgat which the mend’ em: occurred, it
said petititmcr was not drtivmg the bus
§i1§cs if. :fisA*hatfi h¢ had stain: was in be behind him, the
V . ncxt datt.z. Labour Court after no-&c1:1g’ ‘ the said end’ cum
,, , ‘A the Court had come to the conclusion that
the ‘E§quny’ Qfimr had waned” the said’ ma’ cncc which was
” fav.§.i1abLe before him and had themmer come to the
” conclusion. Thctmfore, the same dues not suggest of any
J7
.-
IV
perversity. Further the Labour Court on its ‘
apprcciafing such and’ ermc was ihc_ .
mascara’ duct as alleged against the wsfifl ”
by him.
7. Insoiiar as and the
punishment Labour Court
had also taltgeii the ‘gecidcnt committed
inasmu:;:}1″as, of pcrsan and injury in
several stated that the mattaer dates
not merit. 1–A of the I.lZ).Act. Thereafter,
A the Cotxzft–.hg§__A1.:phe1d the punishment imposed by
the appfication filed in this regard has
A 8. VT]1.€¢4j–.;east3ns_ indimtcd by the Labour Court and the
‘fact that evidence avaflabke before it had been considered
‘L-Vby. Labour Court would indicate that the Labour Court
kept in View the materials and had came to a
finding of iiwt. Thercflam, the same does not H
pelvcxsity so as to ca}! for 3; V
Ame’ 16 227 of the Consfitmion of
nature of the misconriuct
petitioner who was not a Adm: Vl!::V*. i§n
had attempted his though he was
not authorised tgzf.- *dp I death and
injuly to to the bus.
Hmem cannot be any
mispladéd other lighter punishment
£30 the
5;.» jrza.-1; is also fortified by a similar View
‘A — “b,i,a’ a Vv’Wf3§nch of Punjab and Haxyana High
of PRAKASH CHAN!) –vs- THE IABOUR
mum, AND OTHERS reponnd in 1994 LLR 447,
‘W1A1t’:il’61’I:i held that when charge of unauthcmzml’ dmr:’ ‘mg
f”«;g;~g.g¢j’AA’_:aehic1e is proved d ‘the Labour Court also finds me
.-
A
enqu1ry’ to be flair and pmrpcr, the te:m1:ma’ is. V’
uphdd. «W-.
Hence, oonsiclaring all the$c:’»..as§§wct§3 (:f tlié’
I am ofthc View that the award fhc
on 16.3.2006 which is this not
call for intcrfiaxencc. being devoid of
357%.
Iudqe