[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Sri Samuel Raju vs The Chief Traffic Manager on 25 March, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:17030
WP No. 18856 of 2013
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
WRIT PETITION NO. 18856 OF 2013 (L-KSRTC)
BETWEEN:
THE CHIEF TRAFFIC MANAGER
B M T C., CENTRAL OFFICES
K H ROAD, SHANTHI NAGAR
BANGALORE - 560 027.
HEREIN REPRESENTED BY
THE CHIEF LAW OFFICER
B M T C., BANGALORE.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI B.L.SANJEEV, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI N.MARI,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
Digitally DEAD BY HIS LRs
signed by C
HONNUR 1(a) SMT. RATHNAMMA,
SAB W/O LATE MARI,
Location: AGED 52 YEARS,
HIGH COURT DIED. HENCE DELETED V/O
OF DATED 21.10.2016
KARNATAKA
1(b) SAMUEL RAJAN,
S/O LATE MARI,
AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS,
#100, 5TH CROSS,
PILLA REDDY NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 043.
...RESPONDENTS
[BY SRI S.B.MUKKANNAPPA, AGA FOR R1 (a & b)]
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:17030
WP No. 18856 of 2013
HC-KAR
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE AWARD
DATED 16.10.2012, PASSED BY THE III ADDL. LABOUR COURT,
BANGALORE, IN ID.NO.101/05, PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-D AND
ETC.,
THIS PETITION IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
ORAL ORDER
This petition is filed assailing the award dated 16.10.2012
in ID No.101/2005 on the file of III Additional Labour Court at
Bengaluru. In terms of the said award, the order dated
31.05.2005 passed by the petitioner-Corporation dismissing the
workman-respondent of this petition is set-aside and the
petitioner-Corporation is directed to reinstate the workman into
service to the post held by him as on 31.05.2005.
2. The petitioner-Corporation is before this Court on
the premise that the respondent-workman has secured
employment by producing a fake transfer certificate. The
petitioner-Corporation contends that the School from which the
certificate is issued was not in existence. To substantiate
NC: 2026:KHC:17030
HC-KAR
contention, the Corporation has produced Ex.M1, the letter
issued by the Headmaster.
3. Since, the learned counsel for the respondent-
workman has seriously disputed the authenticity of the said
letter and the jurisdiction of the Headmaster to issue such
letter, the Court had directed the learned Government
Advocate to furnish the report as to whether the said School
from which the respondent-workman has furnished the Transfer
Certificate was in existence.
4. The learned Government Advocate has placed the
report of the jurisdictional Block Education Officer. The same is
taken on record.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent-workman would
submit that the document is placed for the first time before this
Court and the respondent should have the fair opportunity to
contest the said report and the report cannot be accepted
unless it is established that the report is filed after proper
verification.
NC: 2026:KHC:17030
HC-KAR
6. The report is submitted before this Court for the first
time. Without entering into the merits of the matter, and
without effecting anything on the impugned award, to enable
the Labour Court to pass Award based on the report, if it is
found to be acceptable after affording opportunity to the
respondents of this petition to contest the report, the award is
set aside.
7. The petitioner-Corporation is permitted to produce
the report and to lead evidence to substantiate the report
submitted before this Court today.
8. The legal representatives of the deceased
respondent-workmen are permitted to contest the report by
cross-examining the author of the report if the respondents
desire to cross-examine the author of the report.
9. Hence the following:
ORDER
(i) Writ Petition is allowed in part;
(ii) Impugned award dated 16.10.2012 in ID
No.101/2005 passed by the III Additional
Labour Court, Bengaluru, is set aside;
NC: 2026:KHC:17030
HC-KAR
(iii) The matter is remitted to the Labour Court for
fresh consideration, in the backdrop of the
subsequent developments already referred to
above in the order;
(iv) The parties are directed to appear before the
Labour Court on 10.04.2026 without any
further notice;
(v) Both parties shall co-operate for early
disposal; and
(vi) Since the dispute is of the year 2005, the
Labour Court shall endeavour to dispose of
the matter within 4 months.
(vii) It is made clear that the remand order should
not be construed as having expressed
anything on the merits of the matter.
Sd/-
(ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE)
JUDGE
AV
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1
