North East Karnataka Road Transport ... vs Murlidhar on 5 November, 2008

[Cites 0, Cited by 117]

Karnataka High Court

North East Karnataka Road Transport ... vs Murlidhar on 5 November, 2008

Bench: Ajit J Gunjal

..n..--..u-. . uvu wvuna vr nnnlvnaﬂnﬂ I'1!Ul1 I.

IN' THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA. ~ 

CIRCUIT BENCH AT GULBARGA:-* 

DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF..NQVEM"8EI§.;;V 200é3   

THE I-ION'BLE MR.  "}&e.1i'__1'  
WRIT m.:'rrrIo:saj NO. :"0__F' 

1. North East   V 
Transmrt      
Central :(3fﬁ$_C}..S£?.Iig:cf--._SEidhf?1Ih'j1,  '
Rcprssenfed bjaits 'C1"xi_cI'Law..--C)ﬁ'1ccr.

2. {mama} V(',0;i1f.'m;)1ié:If','[~T.__" __

NEKRTC', %Kopp'2d{ Divisitufi,

K0ppa1§«<L - A 

V  _ Agtéd abtrut 44 years,
"  '*«_ 0:':(:: 'Ex-Conductor,
   r~zE;£s:.*~"<*'1'c,
%   S50 Sitaramcharya Joshi,
 . _ . " 0 Pinjar Ony Old Durge Lodge,
 ,  Gangavafhi,

District : Koppal. .. Respondent

(By Sri. Sanjeev Kumar C. Patil, Adv. fer Sri. Manikappa Patil, A<:iv.} Peﬁtionem.

(mi gm. K. Babshetty, Sri. Sriharsha R.

--Sums}:1 Prabhu, Advs. } .... u-u-11v-I I uurrl \...L) 9415: Ur KAKNATAKA H!GH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH CO CO " 'iipassed by the diseipiinary authority was just and This writ petition filed under Artieies 226 of the Constitution, praying to call fog" «recgiiﬂs pertaining to KID 73/2001 on the ﬁle of 1 4_ Guibarga; quash the award passed by 'Laboi11fW. 'V Court, Gulbarga in KID No.73;:2oo1¢ (ii_4ated"i'3,6§2O0-4-V' vide Annexure 'A'. --.

the court made the following: 2 This petition coming for fliiial day, * O' The petitioner the award passect te the said award; "been modiﬁed fmm that of iito oiihiéiritiihoidixig ﬁve yearly inoremeiite with effect without backwages for the entire " period'.

K. Badrashetty, learned counsel apoeering petitioner submits that the respondent A;;1_ héi'biiiia1 offender, in as much as, he has been in 60 cases earlier and got away with minor uwvpiiiiiisilxnents. She submits that the dismissal order proper in the circumstances of the case. » ' .- ..-..,... ...,,.,,..\. IJI' mr-amwnul-uu-\ mun Luulu or KARNATAKA HIGH coumr OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT 05 KARNATAKA HIGH ct Lamar Court held that the enquiry is not proper. But, however, on other issues recordeédua' . that indeed the misconduct is prayed. B'£1t'h?}Wever.was""

of the opinion that the punishment in the CiI'CuIﬂS't3D.{36S of the

6. I have perused by the Labour Court.

7'. ~-foiuxid that the evidence on reeordvv-wouldVdis'¢1.oseV4"tht;it the petitiener has committed the ._ far as penalty imposed is V. it "ze. ..... Labour Court: has exercised its '<j1i'ssretiVo'n has directed reinstatement by H yearly increments with cumulative effee1L., vﬁithéout backwages for the entire period. To my would be a just punishmerzt in the V' oirc1 am stances of the case. nu. « V-a\uI\Jl'\I ur nnnveuuz-ma nluﬂ OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA I-RGH C(

8. Having pemsed the award, I am of the net call for interference. There is no 1;_m_a1'i£"

petition. Petition rejected. Ru3e;d.is{;haI~g"éd;'::'_';'. "

5 T. A vge

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court