KARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION Vs. KARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION STAFF AND WORKERS FEDERATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN these appeals, the appellant has called in question the correctness of the order dated march 20, 2000 made in Writ Petition Nos. 7601 to 7603 of 1997 by the learned single judge (Karnataka State Road Transport corporation Staff and Workers' Federation, bangalore and Others v. Karnataka State Road transport Corporation, Bangalore and another), 2000-III-LLJ (Supp)-1366 (Kant)wherein he has struck down Regulation 9 (5)and 9 (6) of the Karnataka State Road Transport corporation Servants (Conduct and Discipline)Regulations, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Regulations') on the ground that the said] regulations are violative of the rights guaranteed to the petitioners under Article 19 (1) (c) of the Constitution.

(2.) THE appellant in this appeal is the, karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as 'the Corporation' ). The 1st respondent is the Karnataka State Road transport Corporation Staff and Workers' federation (hereinafter referred. to as 'the federation') and the respondents 2 and 3 are the members of the Federation in the cadre of superintendent and Security Guard in the establishment of the Corporation. The respondents 1 to 3 filed Writ Petition Nos. 7601 to 7603 of 1997 before this Court challenging the validity of Regulation 9 (5) and 9 (6) of the regulations inter alia contending that the said regulations violate the right to form an association given to them under Articles 19 (1) (c) of the Constitution of India and it is not a reasonable restriction imposed by the state under Article 19 (4) of the Constitution and on various other grounds. The learned single Judge heard the said writ petitions along with other connected writ petitions referred to in the order impugned in these appeals. Since we are concerned in these appeals only with regard to the conclusion reached by the learned single Judge in the Writ Petition Nos. 7601 to 7603 of 1997; and it is convenient to deal with) the appeals filed challenging the correctness of the order made in the other connected writ petitions separately, we find it unnecessary to refer to the grievance made in other connected writ petitions in these appeals and we are confining ourselves in this judgment only with regard to the grievance made against the order made by the learned single Judge in Writ petition Nos. 7601 to 7603 of 1997.

(3.) IN the writ petitions the respondents 1 to 3 have prayed for quashing of two government Orders dated February 13, 1997; and the order according approval for insertion of sub-regulations (5) and (6) to Regulation 9 of the Regulations, copies of which have been produced as Annexures-A and C to the writ petitions and also for quashing of the government Orders dated February 13, 1997, copies of which have been produced as annexures-B and D to the writ petitions incorporating sub-regulations (5) and (6) to regulation 9 and also setting out who should be treated as supervisory personnel and security personnel. A prayer was also made to quash the Circular dated February 17, 1997 issued by the Corporation notifying the amendment of Regulation 9 by incorporating sub-regulations (5) and (6) and also excluding the supervisory and security staff from participating in the activities of the trade union. The learned single Judge in the light of the rival contentions advanced by the counsels appearing for the parties at paragraph 21 of the order formulated five questions for consideration. They read as hereunder: