1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.B. BAJANTHRI
WRIT PETITION NO.58496/2016 (GM-TEN)
BETWEEN:
M/S. ABHIMAANI PUBLICATIONS LTD.,
NO.2/4, DR. RAJKUMAR ROAD,
RAJAJINAGAR,
BENGALURU - 560 010
REPRESENTED BY ITS
MANAGING DIRECTOR
SRI. T. VENKATESH ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. VIJAYA KUMAR C., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY THE
SECRETARY TO EDUCATION
DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING,
BANGALORE - 560 001.
2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,
KARNATAKA TEXT BOOK SOCIETY
NO.4, DSERT, BUILDING,
100FEET ROAD, HOSAKEREHALLI,
BANASHANKERI 3RD STAGE
BANGALORE - 560 085
3. THE COMMISSIONER
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC
INSTRUCTION, NEW
PUBLIC OFFICE
NRUPATHUNGA ROAD,
K.R.CIRCLE, BANGALORE - 560 001
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SRINIVASA GOWDA, AGA)
2
THIS WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED
27.10.2016 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT AT ANNEX-R AND DIRECT
RESPONDENTS TO RELEASE THE WITH HELD AMOUNT TOWARDS
PENALTY AND LIQUIDATED DAMAGES AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING PHYSICAL
HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING HEARING (OPTIONAL), THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER
In the instant petition, petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs:
(i) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ quashing the order dated 27.10.2016 in No.A7/KAPA.PUSAM/MU.MA.49/2015-16 issued by the respondent society produced at ANNEXURE-R and direct the respondents to release the withheld amount towards penalty and liquidated damages.
(ii) Issue any other writ or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.
2. On 23.12.2020, the following order was passed:
State counsel is hereby directed to furnish copy of the order of the penalty imposed on the petitioner in respect of delay in supplying text books pursuant to the contract entered into between the petitioner and State-Respondents on the next date of hearing so as to ascertain whether 3 the petitioner has been heard before the imposition of penalty and forfeiting of the EMD amount.
Re-list this matter on 06.01.2021 for further hearing.
3. Learned counsel on instructions from Assistant Director of Karnataka Text Book Society submitted that petitioner was not heard before passing the impugned order.
4. On the above aspect, time and again, Courts have held that before passing any adverse order against a person whose civil rights are affected, in such circumstances, concerned person should be heard in the matter. Identical issue was dealt by the Apex Court in the case of VIPUL BHAI MANSINGH BHAI vs STATE OF GUJARAT reported in (2017)13 SCC 51, in Paragraph 37 of the aforesaid judgment, it is held as under:
37. A Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Thimmasamudram Tobacco Co. v.
CCE 1960 SCC OnLine AP 209: AIR 1961 AP. 324, held that: (SCC OnLine AP para11) "11... In a case where the flaw in the order appealed against consists of in the non-observance of certain procedure or in not giving effect to the maxim 'audi alteram partem', it is open to the officer concerned to start the procedure once again with a view to follow the rules of procedure and the principles of natural justice." The said principle laid down by the Andhra Pradesh High Court was approved by this Court in Supt (Tech I) Central 4 Excise v. Pratap Rai, (1978) 3 SCC 113, pp. 116-17, para 6
5. Accordingly, the impugned orders bearing No.A7/KAPA.PUSAM/MU.MA.49/2015-16 dated 27.10.2016 is set-aside. Writ Petition stands allowed. Respondents are at liberty to proceed to pass order in accordance with law after providing ample opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The aforesaid exercise shall be completed within a period of four months from the date of receipt of this order.
Sd/-
JUDGE Brn