The Divisional Controller v. Mr. M. T. Chandrashekar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA REVIEW PETITION NO. 186 OF 2024 BETWEEN:

THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER KSRTC, BANGALORE CENTRAL DIVISION, SHANTHINAGARA, BANGALORE - 560 027, NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER, KSRTC, SHANTHI NAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 027. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SANJEEV B L.,ADVOCATE) AND:

MR. M. T. CHANDRASHEKAR S/O. THIMMEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/O. K. MAVINAHALLI VILLAGE, KANNATHUR POST, THURUVEKERE TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT - 572 101. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. L SHEKAR.,ADVOCATE)(ABSENT)

THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF R/W SECTION 114 CPC, TO REVIEW THE ORDER DATED 30/01/2024 PASSED IN W.P NO.27866/2018 (VIDE ANNEXURE-B) IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

Location: High Court of Karnataka

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

ORAL ORDER

The present review petition is filed seeking to review the order dated 30.01.2024 (Annexure-B) passed by this Court in W.P.No.27866/2018.

¶2By the said order dated 30.01.2024, this Court partly allowed the writ petition filed by the Divisional Controller (KSRTC), and confirmed the award passed by the Labour Court insofar as it related to reinstatement, continuity of service and other consequential benefits by withholding six increments cumulatively. However, the direction of the Labour Court granting 20% back wages was set aside, and the order of the Labour Court stood modified.

¶3The respondent was dismissed from service on

11.06.2013, pursuant to which, he raised an industrial dispute in Reference No.57/2015, before the Labour Court. The Labour Court set aside the order of dismissal and directed reinstatement to

his original post with 20% back wages, continuity of service and other consequential benefits by withholding six increments cumulatively. The said award was challenged by the review petitioner in the aforesaid W.P.No.27866/2018. This Court, by an interim order dated 07.09.2018, stayed the award, subject to the respondent being reinstated into service. Accordingly, the respondent was reinstated into service on

26.10.2018. Subsequently, the writ petition was disposed of on merits.

¶4The present review petition has been filed contending that, pursuant to the interim order dated 07.09.2018 passed by this Court, the respondent was reinstated into service. However, while working at Kunigal depot, he allegedly remained unauthorisedly absent from duty. Following a domestic enquiry into the said misconduct, the respondent was dismissed from service by order dated 12.10.2023.

¶5Learned counsel appearing for the review petitioner submits that the aforesaid subsequent event, namely dismissal of the respondent from service on 12.10.2023, was not brought to the notice of this Court at the time of disposal of the writ petition. It is

in these circumstances that the present review petition has been filed.

¶6It is not in dispute that, pursuant to the interim order passed by this Court, the respondent was reinstated into service on

26.10.2018. This Court partly allowed the writ petition filed by the review petitioner.

¶7In view of the subsequent dismissal of the respondent from service on 12.10.2023, it is necessary to clarify that the benefits flowing from the order passed in the writ petition would be available to the respondent only up to the date of this subsequent dismissal i.e., 12.10.2023.

¶8With the said observation, the Review Petition stands disposed of.

Sd/- ________________________ JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

PHM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1