D.LOKESHA, DRIVER-CUM-CONDUCTOR, BADGE NO.657, H.N.PURA UNIT, PRESENTLY WORKING AT HASSAN UNIT-2 vs THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLER, KSRTC, HASSAN DIVISION, HASSAN. — 103/2023
Case under Industrial Disputes Act Section 10-1-d. Disposed: Uncontested--SETTLED IN LOK ADALATH on 14th March 2026.
Ref. - Reference u/s 10-1-d of ID Act
CNR: KAMS060001492023
Filing Number
103/2023
Filing Date
23-12-2023
Registration No
103/2023
Registration Date
23-12-2023
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
Petitioner(s)
D.LOKESHA, DRIVER-CUM-CONDUCTOR, BADGE NO.657, H.N.PURA UNIT, PRESENTLY WORKING AT HASSAN UNIT-2
Respondent(s)
THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLER, KSRTC, HASSAN DIVISION, HASSAN.
Hearing History
Judge: 618-Presiding Officer Industrial Tribunal Mysore
Disposed
RESERVED FOR AWARD
Settlement or Compromise
Settlement or Compromise
Settlement or Compromise
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 14-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 12-03-2026 | RESERVED FOR AWARD |
| 11-03-2026 | Settlement or Compromise |
| 11-02-2026 | Settlement or Compromise |
| 07-01-2026 | Settlement or Compromise |
Interim Orders
The court rejected D. Lokesha's claim against KSRTC Hassan Division. The respondent's counsel presented evidence that on 12.02.2020, inspection officers found only 5 passengers on a bus route where more were expected, and recovered fare collections signed by both the petitioner and passengers, establishing that Lokesha had attempted to defraud the organization. The court found the petitioner guilty of misconduct and denied his claim for relief. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The court rejected D. Lokesha's claim against KSRTC Hassan Division. The respondent's counsel presented evidence that on 12.02.2020, inspection officers found only 5 passengers on a bus route where more were expected, and recovered fare collections signed by both the petitioner and passengers, establishing that Lokesha had attempted to defraud the organization. The court found the petitioner guilty of misconduct and denied his claim for relief. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts