NAGESHA, DRIVER-CUM-CONDUCTOR, BADGE NO.2848/7071, KUNDAPURA UNIT. vs THE DIVISSIONAL CONTROLER, KSRTC, MANGALURU DIVISION, MANGALURU, SOUTH CANARA DISTRICT. — 66/2022
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: KAMS060002012022
Filing Number
66/2022
Filing Date
26-11-2022
Registration No
66/2022
Registration Date
26-11-2022
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)
NAGESHA, DRIVER-CUM-CONDUCTOR, BADGE NO.2848/7071, KUNDAPURA UNIT.
Respondent(s)
THE DIVISSIONAL CONTROLER, KSRTC, MANGALURU DIVISION, MANGALURU, SOUTH CANARA DISTRICT.
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 |
| 28-01-2026 | RESERVED FOR AWARD |
| 22-01-2026 | Settlement or Compromise |
| 13-12-2025 | Settlement or Compromise |
| 11-12-2025 | Settlement or Compromise |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: 66/2022 The court found that the inquiry against the petitioner (a KSRTC driver-conductor) was conducted in a one-sided manner in violation of procedural fairness and C&D Regulations. The respondent failed to provide the petitioner with copies of key documents (CDs), denied him adequate opportunity to cross-examine witnesses, and did not furnish him a copy of the inquiry officer's written statement, thereby depriving him of a fair hearing and proper defense. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: 66/2022 The court found that the inquiry against the petitioner (a KSRTC driver-conductor) was conducted in a one-sided manner in violation of procedural fairness and C&D Regulations. The respondent failed to provide the petitioner with copies of key documents (CDs), denied him adequate opportunity to cross-examine witnesses, and did not furnish him a copy of the inquiry officer's written statement, thereby depriving him of a fair hearing and proper defense. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts