Karnataka High Court
Sri B I Shankappa vs The Divisional Controller Karnataka ... on 30 October, 2008
Author: H N Nagamohan Das
Bench: H N Nagamohan Das
+ eae IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 30°° DAY OF OCTOBER, 2008 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PLN. NAGAMOHAN DAS. WRIT PETITION No, 137042007 (LE) BETWEEN ; Sri. B ISHANKAPPA SON OF B AFTHAPPA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS RUAT NO.669, MIG-1, 3°? PHASE -- SHARADA DEVI NAGAR a MYSORE-27. Boe os PETITIONER BoB uP My Sri VS NAIKU ADM THE DIVISIONAL Cf ONTROLLER ee KARNATAKA STATE ROAD. TRANSPORT CORPORATION -- MYSORE DIVISION ©. AY SORE, a om _.. RESPONDENT
(By Sti GAR GOWDA, ADV) THIS V RIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 7 THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA WITH A PRAYER TO OL SHUTHE AWARD IN REF.NO.43/6 DT. 17.2.2005 PASSED BY 27 la:
. FRE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL MYSORE. A CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH IS PRODUCED AS ANS-B TO THE EATENT THE PETITIONER IS AGGRIEVED, AS THAT PART OF THE AWARD = SUPPERS FROM ERRORS WHICH ARE APPARENT ON THE FACT GF THE RECORD AND ETC.
wma THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY THE» HEARING B GROUP THIS DAY. THE COURT MADE POLLOWIAG.
GRDER $e hgae y In this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for a wrif in the -- nature of certiorari to quash the award dated 17.02.2008 in reference Now ener lap eey boss tg gehakene See sTe irisofar as if relates to-
43/1996 passed bv the Industrial Tribunal at? confirming the order of penalty dated 02.09.1995). ¥ *. Petitioner w a8 & "any er ig td ir he responc ent -- the Karnataka State Road Transpart C orpor atic n (ter short - the Corporation') For certain misconduct committed by he Corporation levied penalty vide . ord ders dz 30.06, 1992 sain it cremanis and recovering certain amounts.
ay these order's of penalties the petitioner raised a dispute hs fore the Tribunal by way of reference under Section 10(1)(D) of the industrial Disputes Act Cthe Act' for short} in reference No. 43/1996. 'Before the Vs buna t both the patties adduced evidence and produced
-certsin docurments. After hearing both the parties and on appreciation af "the: pleadings, oral and documentary evidence on record the Tribunal ' nassed the impugned award and set aside the order of penalties dated O740 L987, 28.11.1992 and 30.06.1992. Bat the Tribunal confirmed the order of penalty dated 02.09.1993. Hence, this writ petition. jth fad
3. Heard arguments on both the side and perused the entire writ papers.
4, The order of penalty in question dated 02.09.) 1993 pac cities withholding of two increments wilh cumulative effect. This penalize is oy on the petitioner for the accident that he had saused on 2 98, 1984. - The Labour Court noticed the fact that the , petitioner rhas a6 not disputed ie"
accident dated 31.08.1984. Further the petitioner" has not seriously disputed Ex. M14 the sxet ch relating | to aceide at This sketch eflects the . On account negligence on the part of ihe peti ihe oner resulting in ack of this accident the ©: orpe sation ws made eo pay huge amount of compensation fo third parties: The fa is ne convincing explanation from the petitioner about the socidents Th the: faets and circumstances of this case and on appreciation of the rated ont seco the Labour Court had righth passed the impugn red award and the caine is in accordance with law. | find o, Justi fia gxoond:.t0 interfere with the observations made in the impugned 3 aw ward," Accord ingly the writ petition is hereby rejected. Sd/~ Judge ERS'31102008.