IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.25079 OF 2019 (L-KSRTC) BETWEEN:
SRIDHAR C.R S/O LATE RAMANAREDDY DRIVER-CUM-CONDUCTOR TOKEN NO.10991 AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS RESIDING AT CHAKAPALLI VILLAGE PATHANELAVANKI POST SRINIVASAPURA TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT …PETITIONER (BY SHRI. SHANKARAPPA, ADVOCATE) AND:
THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER AND DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY MANAGEMENT OF BMTC CENTRAL OFFICE, EAST ZONE K.H. ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR BENGALURU-560 027 ... RESPONDENT THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED AWARD PASSED BY THE III ADDITIONAL LABOUR COURT, BANGALORE IN I.D.NO.34/2018 DATED 23.04.2019 VIDE ANNEXURE-H TO THIS WRIT PETITION.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Petitioner was working as a driver cum conductor with the BMTC. He remained unauthorisedly absent. After holding an enquiry, the Management removed him from service.
2. Petitioner raised the dispute and matter was referred by the Government to the III Additional Labour Court, Bengaluru. Accordingly, petitioner filed a claim statement under Section 10(2-A) of the Industrial Dispute Act, to set aside the order of dismissal. The Labour Court, on consideration of material on record, has dismissed the claim statement. Hence, this writ petition.
3. Learned advocate for the petitioner urged two grounds in support of this writ petition:
that the medical certificate produced by the petitioner has not been considered; and that medical prescriptions produced at Annexure-C to E to this petition have not been considered by the Labour Court.
4. I have carefully considered submissions of learned advocate for petitioner and perused the records.
5. The Labour Court has recorded that the workman has produced four medical documents namely, Exhibits W1 to W4 before it. Exhibit W1 is the medical certificate stating that petitioner was suffering from ‘hepatitis’ and he required rest for 180 days. The said medical certificate neither contains the signature of the doctor nor the date of issuance. It has further recorded that petitioner had remained absent for two years. He did not submit any leave application. The medical prescriptions were not supported by any receipt to prove that he had purchased the medicines. The Tribunal has also recorded that on an earlier occasion, petitioner had remained unauthorisedly absent for a period of 84 days and 58 days.
6. It was urged by the learned advocate for the petitioner that the Tribunal has wrongly recorded that medical certificate does not contain the date of issuance. To a specific query made by this Court, he adverted to Annexure-B, the medical certificate issued by SNR District Hospital. It does not contain the date of issuance of certificate. However, it is recorded in the certificate that thump impression of the patient was taken on 28th December 2015. He placed reliance on medical prescriptions at Annexures C to E issued by Narasimharaja District Hospital, Kolar. They also do not contain the date. Thus, dateless prescriptions were produced before the Tribunal and the same were not supported with any receipts for having purchased the medicines.
7. Further, the medical certificate issued by the Government Hospital certifies that in doctor’s opinion absence from duty for 180 days between 02.07.2015 and 28.12.2015 was necessary. Except this, there is no other material to support petitioner’s contention that he was suffering from hepatitis. In the circumstances, no exception can be taken to the findings recorded by the Tribunal and dismissing the claim petition.
8. Resultantly, this writ petition fails and it is accordingly dismissed. No costs.
Yn.
Sd/- JUDGE