a ‘IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS DIE 4TH DAY OF JUNE 1998 BEFORE ThE HON’SLE MR.JIJSTZE GPATRI B*SAVANA GOJO WRIT_PETITION NIJIBER 24020 OF 1990 npenoene afl flnna_efl Between: H/s karneteks State Road Transport Corporation KH Road, Bangalore—27 —Petitioner (By 5 ri Rem tlohan Recfdy, Adv.) I • The PreØding Officer Additional ‘.bour Court Gandhinager Bangalore 560 009 2. H. Govindappa son of Honneppa resident of No.539, Right Side St.Rukmini Lodge CJ,iqflallapur 562 101 —Respondents Coy ri V. Lakshminarayena,Adv. for R-2; tls.Shsnthskumari, HCGP for Rl) This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution seeking t. quash the award dated 25—5—1990 at Annexure..U passed in Ref .No.171 of 1968 by the first respondent. This writ petition coming on for htaring this day, the Court made the following: ORDER Ms. Shenthakumari, learned HCGP appears for the first respondent. 2. The employer KSRTC 3 in this writ petition under Articles 226 end 227 of the Constitution, let p quasling of the award of the second Addit..cnal Labour Court, Bangalore dated 25—5—1990 at Annexureea. 3. On the charge tint . the time his bus was checked, the secord respordent conductor in the petitionea KTC had “ut issued tickuts to 7 passengers irspat of ha ing collated it fare tram them 1 ê.doaesticwas held in that regard andon proof of aisconducthe was dismissed. He raised an industrial dispute in that regard. Before the Labour Court 1 he conceded fairness of the dnestic en.juiry. Labour Court did not find my perversity in the finding of the disciplinary authority with regard to proof of charge. Acting under Section hA of the Industrial Disojjtea Act, 1947 (‘Act’ for short , ..efrur tobrt held the punishmeit of diseissel from service to be disproportionate to the said charge, and in its place, has subatit ted a lesser punishment of comolete denial of back wages in addition to withholding of one future increment. In the circumstances, I find no arbitrariness in the Labour Court so acting under Section hA o’ the Act. 4 There is no infirmity in the impuqneo asrd, Writ Petition djsmjssed Sd! IUDGE