Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Government Can't Deny Implied Surrender After Refusing to Accept Possession: Madras HC Clarifies Scope of Section 111(f) of TP Act Custodial Interrogation Must Prevail Over Pre-Arrest Comfort in Hate Speech Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail for Provocative Remarks Against Migrants Mutation Order Without Notice Cannot Stand in Law: Orissa High Court Quashes Tahasildar's Rejection for Violating Natural Justice Cruelty Must Be Grave and Proven – Mere Allegations of Disobedience or Demand for Separate Residence Don’t Justify Divorce: Jharkhand High Court Rejects Husband’s Divorce Appeal Retaliatory Prosecution Cannot Override Liberty: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in PMLA Case Post CBI Trap of ED Officer Illegal Remand Without Production of Accused Is Not a Technical Lapse, But a Constitutional Breach: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Major NDPS Case Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal Findings of Fact Cannot Be Re-Appreciated in an Appeal Under Section 10F Companies Act: Madras High Court Equality Is Not A Mechanical Formula, But A Human Commitment: P&H High Court Grants Visually Impaired Mali Retrospective Promotions With Full Benefits Orissa High Court Rules Notice for No Confidence Motion Must Include Both Requisition and Resolution – Provision Held Mandatory Ashramam Built on Private Land, Managed by Family – Not a Public Religious Institution: Andhra Pradesh High Court Quashes Endowments Notification Cruelty Must Be Proved, Not Presumed: Gujarat High Court Acquits Deceased Husband In 498A Case After 22 Years Trade Dress Protection Goes Beyond Labels: Calcutta High Court Affirms Injunction Over Coconut Oil Packaging Mimicry Mere Filing of Income Tax Returns Does Not Exonerate the Accused: Madras High Court Refuses Discharge to Wife of Public Servant in ₹2 Crore DA Case

Inordinate Delay In Raising Disputes Renders Them Stale – Karnataka High Court Set Aside Industrial Tribunal Award

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Karnataka High Court, presided over by the Hon’ble Ms. Justice Jyoti Mulimani, has set aside an award by the Industrial Tribunal, emphasizing the impact of delay and laches in raising industrial disputes. The case involved the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) challenging the Tribunal’s decision which had previously overturned a disciplinary action against a former employee.

The Court, in its judgment dated November 16, 2023, highlighted the principle that “an inordinate delay in raising the dispute” can render the dispute “stale” and unworthy of consideration. The observation came in light of the respondent, a former driver of KSRTC, raising a dispute against his punishment seven years after it was imposed.

Justice Mulimani, in her decision, reiterated the established legal principle that the existence of an industrial dispute and the timely raising of such disputes are critical to their adjudication. The Court cited the Apex Court’s decision in ‘Prabhakar vs. Joint Director, Sericulture Department and Another’ to underline the notion that industrial disputes should not be raised after considerable lapses of time.

The original disciplinary action, dating back to 2003, involved the respondent driver being punished for carrying unauthorized passengers. This punishment was initially set aside by the Industrial Tribunal in 2018, only to be reinstated by the High Court’s current judgment.

Smt. Renuka H.R., the advocate representing the petitioner, KSRTC, focused her arguments on the extensive delay and its implications, refraining from delving into the merits of the case. The respondents, the legal heirs of the deceased driver, were unrepresented.

Date of Decision: 16 November, 2023

KARNATAKA VS  C.D.RAMAIAH .etc

Latest Legal News