IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU ON THE 24TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. G. PANDIT WRIT APPEAL No.2589 OF 2018 (L-KSRTC) BETWEEN:
SRI. U. S. VENUGOPAL, S/O SRI.U.SOMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, EX. CONDUCTOR, BADGE NO.1314, REPRESENTED BY MAZDOOR ASSOCIATION, FLEXI PAI BAZAR, MANGALORE-575 001.
(BY SRI. SHEKAR L., ADVOCATE) AND ... APPELLANT THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, K.S.R.T.C. MANGALORE DIVISION, MANGALORE-575 001. ... RESPONDENT THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 11/11/2016 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WRIT PETITION 32040/2014 AND ALSO THE AWARD PASSED BY THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL AT MYSORE IN REF. NO. 155/2008, DATED 30/1/2013 VIDE ANNEXURE-D AND CONSEQUENTLY REMAND THE MATTER BACK TO THE TRIBUNAL FOR FRESH DISPOSAL AFTER CONDUCTING PROCEEDINGS THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, RAVI MALIMATH J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT There is a delay of 597 days in filing the appeal. However, learned counsel has addressed arguments on merits.
2. The learned Single Judge while considering the case of the writ petitioner noted the fact that even though the case was listed before the Tribunal on five dates between 23.02.2012 and 23.11.2012, it is indicated that the workman has not appeared nor was there any representation. He has remained consistently absent. The award is passed on 30.01.2013. Even though reasonable opportunity has been granted to the parties, the workman has not shown any diligence in prosecuting the case.
3. Appellant’s counsel contends that there was no communication by the Union to the workman. However, that cannot constitute a ground since it is not disposed of on the next date itself. Substantial opportunity has been granted. The learned Single Judge has rightly rejected the petition. Accordingly the writ appeal is dismissed.
4. Consequently, I.A.No.1 of 2018 filed for condoning the delay of 597 days and I.A.No.2 of 2018 filed for production of additional documents does not survive for consideration. Hence, both the applications are rejected.
Sd/- Sd/-
JUDGE JUDGE NG* CT:KHV