Karnataka High Court quashes suspension of constable found sleeping during 16-hour shift

Bengaluru: The High Court of Karnataka has quashed the suspension of a sleep-deprived constable who was found taking a power nap during a 16-hour shift. 

The court noted that the constable had been overworked by back-to-back eight-hour shifts for 60 days without a break. Citing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Justice M Nagaprasanna said that employees in any organisation must have a work-life balance. 

Chandrashekhar, a Karnataka State Transport (KST) constable since 2016, had been transferred to the Kalyana Karnataka Road Transport Corporation's (KKRTC) Kuknoor depot in Koppal division due to a staff shortage. 

In 2024, videos of him sleeping on duty circulated on WhatsApp and social media. 

In his defence, Chandrashekhar stated that he had taken medicines on the doctor's advice and needed a 10-minute power nap as he had worked second and third shifts without a break. 

On April 23, 2024, the Vigilance Department recommended action against Chandrashekhar and recruiting two more constables due to the heavy workload on three constables. In July 2024, the KKRTC suspended Chandrashekhar. 

Chandrashekhar challenged this in the high court. While he contended that sleep deprivation had forced him to doze off, the KKRTC argued that the video had brought it disrepute. 

The court noted that while three constables work eight-hour shifts in a 24-hour cycle, the petitioner had worked back-to-back shifts (16 hours) for 60 days without a break. 

"It may be a constable today, tomorrow it can be anybody. Depriving sleep of any human being will lead to falling asleep anywhere. Therefore, sleep and leisure are considered an important facet of the balance that is to be struck between work and life," Justice Nagaprasanna observed. 

The court further noted that Article 24 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights stipulates that everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay. It also cited three judgements from the Calcutta and Uttarakhand high courts on the right to sleep and leisure. 

"Therefore, no fault can be found with the petitioner sleeping in duty hours, in the peculiar facts of the case. If the petitioner has slept while on duty, when his duty was restricted to a single shift, it would undoubtedly become misconduct. In the case at hand, the petitioner is made to overwork by two shifts of 16 hours, in 24 hours, for 60 long days without break. Therefore, the action of the respondent placing the petitioner under suspension for the folly of the respondent is undoubtedly an action which suffers from want of bonafides, the order is thus rendered unsustainable and is to be obliterated." 

The court stated that the petitioner was entitled to all consequential benefits, including continuity of service and salary for the period of his suspension.