LAWS(KAR)-2011-6-230

KARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPN., BANGALORE RURAL DIVISION, BANGALORE Vs. KSRTC AND BMTC UNITED EMPLOYEES UNION, BANGALORE AND ORS.

Decided On June 21, 2011
Karnataka State Road Transport Corpn., Bangalore Rural Division, Bangalore Appellant
V/S
Ksrtc And Bmtc United Employees Union, Bangalore And Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner Road Transport Corporation, aggrieved by the award dated 26/9/2008 in AID No. 2/2006 of the Addl. Industrial Tribunal, Bangalore, Annex.K, has presented this petition.

(2.) Facts briefly stated are, Petitioner engaged the services of the respondent as a badli conductor by including his name in the badli list during the year 1977 and removed his name from the said list in the year 1981, which when called in question in W.P. 6939/84, was clubbed with other writ petitions and by common order dated 26/107 1984 (Ex. W74), was allowed and the termination set aside, in the following terms :

(3.) It appears that the respondent reported to duty on 1/1/2000 and thereafter raised an industrial dispute espoused by the KSRTC and BMTC United Employees' Union over non-extending of pay scale of a conductor to the petitioner from 1977 together with increments from time to time. The State Government by Order dated 4/3/2006 referred the industrial dispute for adjudication to the Addl. Industrial Tribunal, registered as AID No.2/06. In that proceeding, respondent-workman filed claim statement alleging despite completion of 180 days of continuous service from 1977 on-wards as on 1/8/1980 was not brought on time scale of pay in terms of the settlement dated 16/2/1978. Petitioner-Corporation. arraigned as 2nd party, on notice entered appearance, resisted the claim by filing a counter-statement. Parties entered trial, when respondent was examined as WW-1 and another John D'Souza, the General Secretary of the Union as WW-2 and marked documents as Ex.Wl to Ex. W77, while the petitioner examined one witness as MW-1 and marked 8 documents as Ex.Ml to Ex.M8. The Industrial Tribunal by the award impugned, held that the respondent had put in 180 days of continuous services as on 1.8.80 and was entitled to continuity of service from 1/8/1980 and also time-scale of pay from that date together, with annual increments and service benefits.