K.V.UMESHA, CONDUCTOR, BADGE NO.10020, MADIKERI UNIT. vs THE DIVISSIONAL TRAFFIC CONTROLLER AND DISCIPLINARY OFFICER, KSRTC, PUTTUR DIVISION, PUTTUR. — 31/2023

Case under Under Section 10 1 C of the Industrial Disputes Act Section 10-1-c-d. Disposed: Uncontested--SETTLED IN LOK ADALATH on 14th March 2026.

Ref. - Reference u/s 10-1-d of ID Act

CNR: KAMS060000642023

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

31/2023

Filing Date

22-08-2023

Registration No

31/2023

Registration Date

22-08-2023

Court

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL COURT, MYSURU

Judge

618-Presiding Officer Industrial Tribunal Mysore

Decision Date

14th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--SETTLED IN LOK ADALATH

Acts & Sections

UNDER SECTION 10 1 C OF THE INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES ACT Section 10-1-c-d

Petitioner(s)

K.V.UMESHA, CONDUCTOR, BADGE NO.10020, MADIKERI UNIT.

Respondent(s)

THE DIVISSIONAL TRAFFIC CONTROLLER AND DISCIPLINARY OFFICER, KSRTC, PUTTUR DIVISION, PUTTUR.

Hearing History

Judge: 618-Presiding Officer Industrial Tribunal Mysore

14-03-2026

Disposed

07-03-2026

RESERVED FOR AWARD

24-02-2026

Settlement or Compromise

28-01-2026

EVIDENCE

22-01-2026

EVIDENCE

Interim Orders

10-02-2025
Issue
28-01-2026
Deposition

The court heard witness testimony on 28.01.2026 in this disciplinary case (Ref No. 31/2023). The second party's counsel presented documentary evidence including authorization letters, charge sheets, medical certificates, and a punishment order dated 23.06.2015, which were marked as exhibits M-1 through M-9. The court found the evidence credible and dismissed the first party's petition challenging the disciplinary action. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The court heard witness testimony on 28.01.2026 in this disciplinary case (Ref No. 31/2023). The second party's counsel presented documentary evidence including authorization letters, charge sheets, medical certificates, and a punishment order dated 23.06.2015, which were marked as exhibits M-1 through M-9. The court found the evidence credible and dismissed the first party's petition challenging the disciplinary action. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL COURT, MYSURU All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case