In a significant ruling emphasizing work-life balance, the Karnataka High Court has overturned the suspension of a Karnataka State Transport (KST) constable who was penalized for sleeping while on duty. The Court observed that the constable, Chandrashekhar, was subjected to excessive working hours due to a staff shortage, making his suspension unjustified.
Justice M Nagaprasanna, who presided over the case, noted that the constable was forced to work 16-hour shifts for nearly two months, double the usual duty hours. The Court acknowledged the biological necessity of sleep, stating:
“If a person is asked to overwork beyond his capacity, the body sometimes makes the said person sleep, as sleep and work-life balance is what is necessary today. It may be a constable today, tomorrow it can be anybody.”
Chandrashekhar was suspended in July 2024 after a video of him sleeping on duty in April went viral. The Kalyan Karnataka Road Transport Corporation (KKRTC) deemed it misconduct, accusing him of bringing disrepute to the department. However, the constable defended himself, arguing that prolonged double shifts left him exhausted, and a vigilance report confirmed staff shortages at his depot.
Supporting his plea, the High Court referred to Article 24 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), which guarantees rest, leisure, and reasonable working hours. The Court stressed that work hours should not exceed 48 hours per week or 8 hours per day, barring exceptional circumstances.
Citing precedents from the Calcutta and Uttarakhand High Courts, Justice Nagaprasanna held that denying workers adequate rest could have severe consequences. The Court firmly ruled:
“If the petitioner has slept while on duty, when his duty was restricted to a single shift, it would undoubtedly become a misconduct. However, in this case, the petitioner was made to work 16-hour shifts for 60 days without a break. The respondent’s action placing him under suspension for their own folly suffers from want of bonafides and is thus unsustainable.”
Accordingly, the Court ordered Chandrashekhar’s reinstatement and directed that he be paid his salary for the suspension period. The ruling sets a significant precedent on labor rights, particularly for overworked personnel in public service.
Advocates Ravi Hegde and Vinay Kumar Bhat represented the petitioner, while Advocate Prashant S Hosmani appeared for the disciplinary authority of KKRTC.
Case: Chandrashekhar vs The Division Controller, Disciplinary Authority, KKRTC – Available on LAWFYI.IO
