MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

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