THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER K.S.R.T.C vs SRI K R RAGHURAMA REDDY

Court
Karnataka High Court

- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57910
WP No. 23689 of 2021


CNR: KAHC010407462021




IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

TH
DATED THIS THE 14 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026


BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

WRIT PETITION NO. 23689 OF 2021 (L-KSRTC)

BETWEEN:
THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER
K.S.R.T.C, KOLAR DIVISION KOLAR
HEREIN REP. BY THE CHIEF LAW OFFICER
K S R T C, CENTRAL OFFICES
K H ROAD, SHANTHI NAGAR
BENGALURU-560027.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SANJEEV B.L., ADVOCATE)







AND:
SRI K R RAGHURAMA REDDY
DRIVER, KOLAR DEPOT, KOLAR
REP. BY THE PRESIDENT
KSRTC STAFF AND WORKERS UNION
KOLAR DIVISION, KOLAR 563101.
…RESPONDENT
(RESPONDENT SERVED UNREPRESENTED )





THIS WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR
RECORDS OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE INDUSTRIAL
TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU PERTAINING TO ID NO.136/2012,
WHICH HAS CULMINATED IN ITS AWARD DATED 02.11.2019
PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-C AND QUASH THE AWARD DATED
02.11.2019 PASSED BY THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL,
BENGALURU IN ID NO.136/2012, PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-C
AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS
UNDER:
Digitally Signed by NARENDRA PRASAD
HAREKOPPA THIMMANNA GOWDA

- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57910
WP No. 23689 of 2021


CNR: KAHC010407462021


CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

ORAL ORDER

1. The present writ petition is filed by the petitioner-
Corporation challenging the award dated 02.11.2019
passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Bengaluru, in I.D.
No.136/2012, whereby the reference raised by the
workman was allowed and the punishment imposed by the
Corporation was set aside.


2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred
to according to their ranking before the Tribunal. The
workman is referred to as the First Party and the
Corporation as the Second Party.


3. The brief facts of the case are that the First Party
was working as a Driver in the Second Party-Corporation.
On 31.05.2009, while he was discharging his duties as a
driver in bus bearing No. F-1348, engaged on a contract
basis to operate on the route from KGF via Rajpet Road to
Nellore, the checking squad intercepted the bus at the
Digitally Signed by NARENDRA PRASAD
HAREKOPPA THIMMANNA GOWDA

- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57910
WP No. 23689 of 2021


CNR: KAHC010407462021


outskirts of Palamanur at about 10:30 a.m. Upon
inspection, it was found that 72 passengers were travelling
in the bus, though the contract permitted only 55
passengers. Based on the report submitted by the
checking squad, the disciplinary authority issued articles of
charge dated 18.06.2009, alleging that the First Party had
unauthorisedly allowed 17 additional passengers to travel
in the bus. The First Party denied the charges. As his
explanation was not accepted, a domestic enquiry was
initiated. Upon completion of the enquiry, the Enquiry
Officer held the charges as proved. Consequently, by order
dated 04.07.2011, the disciplinary authority imposed the
penalty of reduction of basic pay by two stages of annual
increments with cumulative effect. Aggrieved by the said
order, the First Party sought a reference of the dispute to
the Industrial Tribunal. By order dated 16.06.2012, the
Government referred the dispute to the Tribunal, where it
was registered as I.D. No.136/2012. By the impugned
award, the Tribunal allowed the reference and set aside
Digitally Signed by NARENDRA PRASAD
HAREKOPPA THIMMANNA GOWDA

- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57910
WP No. 23689 of 2021


CNR: KAHC010407462021


the punishment imposed by the Corporation. Aggrieved by
the said award, the Corporation has filed the present writ
petition.


4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-
Corporation contended that the bus was engaged on a
contract basis and was permitted to carry only 55
passengers. However, when the checking squad inspected
the bus, 72 passengers were found travelling in it. Thus,
the First Party had unauthorisedly permitted 17 additional
passengers to travel in the bus, in violation of the contract
conditions. It was further contended that the charges had
been duly proved in the domestic enquiry and that the
disciplinary authority had accordingly imposed the penalty.
Without properly appreciating these aspects, the Tribunal
had erred in setting aside the punishment. Hence, learned
counsel sought to allow the writ petition.


5. Though the respondent-workman has been served,
he remains unrepresented.
Digitally Signed by NARENDRA PRASAD
HAREKOPPA THIMMANNA GOWDA

- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57910
WP No. 23689 of 2021


CNR: KAHC010407462021



6. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused
the writ papers.


7. It is not in dispute that the First Party was working
as a Driver in the Second Party-Corporation and was
driving bus bearing No. F-1348 on 31.05.2009. The bus
was engaged on a contract basis for a trip from KGF via
Rajpet Road to Nellore, and the contract permitted the
carriage of only 55 passengers. It is also not in dispute
that, when the checking squad intercepted the bus at
about 10:30 a.m. on the said date, 72 passengers were
found travelling in it, thereby exceeding the permitted
number by 17 passengers.


8. The specific case of the First Party is that the
additional 17 passengers were not unauthorised
passengers but were passengers who had been travelling
in another bus bearing No. F-1347, which had also been
hired along with the bus bearing No.-F-1348 on contract
by one Sri Ramesh for a marriage function. Sri Ramesh
Digitally Signed by NARENDRA PRASAD
HAREKOPPA THIMMANNA GOWDA

- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57910
WP No. 23689 of 2021


CNR: KAHC010407462021


and the driver of the said bus, namely, Subramani, were
examined before the Enquiry Officer. Their evidence
indicates that bus bearing No. F-1347 had suffered a
puncture and that some of the passengers travelling in it
were elderly persons, children and persons suffering from
health conditions, including blood pressure and diabetes.
As the passengers required breakfast, they were taken to
a nearby restaurant in bus bearing No. F-1348. This
explains the presence of the additional passengers in the
bus when it was inspected by the checking squad.


9. It is significant to note that the checking squad did
not allege that the First Party had collected any additional
fare from the 17 passengers or that any excess amount
was found in his possession. The explanation offered by
the First Party is that he had permitted the passengers
travelling in the other bus to board the bus driven by him,
as the other bus had suffered a puncture and the
passengers needed to be taken to a nearby restaurant for
Digitally Signed by NARENDRA PRASAD
HAREKOPPA THIMMANNA GOWDA

- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57910
WP No. 23689 of 2021


CNR: KAHC010407462021


breakfast. The evidence of Sri Ramesh and the driver of
the other bus lends support to the explanation offered by
the First Party.


10. Having regard to the evidence on record, it is evident
that the additional passengers were permitted to travel in
the bus as the other bus had suffered a puncture and the
passengers had to be taken to a nearby restaurant for
breakfast. There is no allegation that the First Party
collected any additional fare from them. In these
circumstances, the Tribunal was justified in setting aside
the punishment imposed by the Corporation. This Court
finds no grounds to interfere with the impugned award.
The writ petition is devoid of merit.


11. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.

Digitally Signed by NARENDRA PRASAD
HAREKOPPA THIMMANNA GOWDA

(H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD)
JUDGE

DM
LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 22