Karnataka High Court
Sri Syed Naveed vs S Chandrashekar on 21 January, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:2373-DB
WA No. 1432 of 2024
C/W CCC No. 793 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2025
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR N. V. ANJARIA, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN
WRIT APPEAL NO. 1432 OF 2024 (L-RES)
C/W
CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 793 OF 2024
IN WA NO. 1432 OF 2024
BETWEEN:
1. THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER
B.M.T.C.
NORTH DIVISION
YASHAWANTHAPURA
Digitally
BENGALURU-560 022
signed by H REPRESENTED BY ITS
K HEMA
Location: CHIEF LAW OFFICER
High Court BMTC, CENTRAL OFFICES
of Karnataka
K.H. ROAD
SHANTHINAGAR
BANGALORE-560 027.
...APPELLANT
(BY SMT. RENUKA H.R., ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:2373-DB
WA No. 1432 of 2024
C/W CCC No. 793 of 2024
AND:
1. SYED NAVEED
S/O SYED SATTAR
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS
R/O. KURUVELI
URDIGERI HOBLI
TUMKUR TALUK
TUMKUR DISTRICT-560 026.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI NAVEED AHMED, ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER DATED 08.04.2024 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE
JUDGE IN WRIT PETITION NO.55896 OF 2015 AND ALLOW THE
WRIT PETITION IN ITS ENTIRETY BY SETTING ASIDE THE
AWARD DATED 20.04.2015 IN ID NO.136 OF 2014 PASSED BY
THE PRINCIPAL LABOUR COURT, BANGALORE IN THE
INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
IN CCC NO. 793 OF 2024
BETWEEN:
1. SRI SYED NAVEED
S/O SYED SATTAR
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
R/AT KURUVELI
URDIGERE HOBLI
TUMKURU TALUK
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:2373-DB
WA No. 1432 of 2024
C/W CCC No. 793 of 2024
TUMKUR-572 140.
...COMPLAINANT
(BY SRI NAVEED AHMED, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. S. CHANDRASHEKAR
THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER
BMTC NORTH DIVISION
YESHWANTPUR
BENGALURU-560 022.
...ACCUSED
(BY SMT. RENUKA H.R., ADVOCATE)
THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF
THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT READ WITH ARTICLE 215
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO TAKE
COGNIZANCE OF CONTEMPT COMMITTED BY THE ACCUSED
WITH REFERENCE TO THE ORDERS PASSED IN WRIT
PETITION NO.55896 OF 2015 DATED 08.04.2024 PRODUCED
HEREIN AT ANNEXURE-A AND TO PROSECUTE AND PUNISH
THE ACCUSED, IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE, ETC.
THIS WRIT APPEAL CONNECTED WITH CCC COMING
ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS
DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE
N. V. ANJARIA
and
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC:2373-DB
WA No. 1432 of 2024
C/W CCC No. 793 of 2024
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA)
Heard learned advocate Ms. H.R.Renuka for the appellant-
the Divisional Controller, Bengaluru Metropolitan Transport
Corporation and learned advocate Mr. Naveed Ahmed for the
respondent.
2. At the instance of original petitioner-the appellant herein, the
challenge in this appeal under Section 4 of the Karnataka High
Court Act, 1961 is addressed to the judgment and order dated
08.04.2024 passed in Writ Petition No.55896 of 2015, whereby
learned Single Judge while dismissing the writ petition of the
appellant herein confirmed the judgment and order of the Labour
Court.
3. On the ground that the respondent-workman had remained
unauthorisedly absent between the period from 26.01.2012 to
22.05.2012, a disciplinary proceeding was initiated against him
which resulted into the order of penalty of dismissal passed by the
employer-Corporation. The same was challenged before the
Labour Court by the workman. The Labour Court allowed the
NC: 2025:KHC:2373-DB
reference of the workman in part, set aside the order of dismissal
and directed reinstatement of the workman however without any
backwages.
3.1. When the said order of the Labour Court came to be
challenged in the writ petition, learned Single Judge considered the
facts and the evidence and observed that the workman had
submitted the leave application at Ex.M-2 and that he had also
given a representation to the employer seeking voluntary
retirement which was at Ex.W-3. It was recorded that the case of
the workman was that he had sought leave for remaining absent in
view that he had been suffering from a disease.
3.2. The medical board examined the workman and gave a
report indicating that the workman had been suffering from chronic
low back ache with non-specific bilateral leg pain and as such, he
was unfit to perform his duty of a driver. Learned Single Judge
took note of the said facts including the leave application of the
petitioner and the report of the medical board indicating the ailment
to come to the conclusion that it was due to medical emergency
which prevented the workman from coming to duty.
NC: 2025:KHC:2373-DB
3.3. Learned Single Judge recorded the finding on the basis
of the operative facts that "the material on record would indicate
that the absence on the part of the workman cannot be termed as
willful absenteeism for the corporation to issue an order of
dismissal".
3.4. Learned Single Judge recorded the finding as under,
"Looking into the facts and circumstances of
the case, it could be held that the imposing
of major penalty of dismissal on the workman
was not justified and the Labour Court has
rightly exercised its discretion in setting aside
the order of dismissal which does not warrant
interference by this Court and the point
framed for consideration is answered
accordingly."
4. The above finding of learned Single Judge and the
consequential dismissal of the petition would hardly be said to be
unreasonable.
5. The judgment and order is eminently just, proper and legal
requiring no interference in the appellate jurisdiction.
6. About the case of the workman that he was unable to
discharge the duty as a driver, learned Single Judge has
proceeded to observe that it will be open for the workman to make
NC: 2025:KHC:2373-DB
a representation in this regard to the Corporation seeking
assignment of light work on the basis of medical report. In these
observations also, this Court is not inclined to interfere with.
7. The challenge to the judgment and order of learned Single
Judge is merit less. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.
In view of dismissal of the appeal, the contempt petition will
not survive. However, it is observed that the compliance of the
order of learned Single Judge shall be effected within four weeks
from the date of service of certified copy of this order.
Sd/-
(N. V. ANJARIA)
CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/-
(M.I.ARUN)
JUDGE
hkh.
