Karnataka High Court
R. Shivakumara vs State Of Karnataka on 3 February, 2021
Author: Satish Chandra Srishananda
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2021
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. SRISHANANDA
WRIT PETITION NO.8868 OF 2020 (S-CAT)
CONNECTED WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.8791 OF 2020 (S-CAT)
IN W.P. NO.8868/2020:
BETWEEN:
1. R. SHIVAKUMARA
S/O. RAJAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
WORKING AS SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (NON-IPS),
KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA,
JUBLIEE CIRCLE,
DHARWAD - 580 001.
2. LAKSHMI GANESH
S/O. V. KRISHNAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
WORKING AS SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (NON-IPS),
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
CRIME AND TRAFFIC,
POLICE COMMISSIONER OFFICE,
A.B. SHETTY CIRCLE,
MANGALORE - 575 001.
2
3. T.J. UDESHA
S/O. T.V. JAYADEVA,
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
WORKING AS ADDITIONAL SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
B.H. ROAD,
NEAR SIDDAGANGA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY,
TUMKURU - 572 101.
4. SACHIN GHORPADE
S/O. PARSHURAM GHORPADE,
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
WORKING AS SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
SP COMMUNAL INTELLIGENCE HEAD OFFICE,
NRUPATUNGA ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 002.
5. V.J. SAJEETH
S/O. JANARDAN,
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
WORKING AS ADDITIONAL SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
NO.5, MILLER ROAD,
VASANTH NAGAR,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI P.S. RAJAGOPAL, SENIOR COUNSEL, ALONG WITH
SRI JAYANTH DEV KUMAR, ADV.)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY,
KARNATAKA GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA
DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL
AND ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS,
KARNATAKA GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
3
3. UNION OF INDIA
BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL,
PUBLIC GRIEVANCES AND PENSION,
NORTH BLOCK,
NEW DELHI - 110 001.
4. UNION PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
DHOLPUR HOUSE,
NEW DELHI - 110 001,
BY ITS SECRETARY.
5. SRI M.V. RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD
MAJOR,
COMMANDANT, 3RD BATTALION,
KARANTAKA STATE RESERVE POLICE,
SARJAPURA MAIN ROAD,
1ST BLOCK, KORAMANGALA,
HSR LAYOUT,
BENGALURU - 560 033.
6. SRI BASAVARAJ ZILLE
MAJOR,
COMMANDANT, VI BATTALION,
KARNATAKA STATE RESERVE POLICE,
KALBURAGI - 585101.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI S.S. MAHENDRA, A.G.A., FOR R-1 & 2;
SRI S.K. ACHARYA, ADV., FOR R-3;
SRI V.N. HOLLA, ADV., FOR R-4;
SRI AJOY KUMAR PATIL, ADV., FOR R-5 & 6)
***
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
ORDER DATED 21-6-2019 PASSED BY THE CENTRAL
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU BENCH, BENGALURU,
IN ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.170/355-359/2016 BY ISSUE OF A
WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI, AND ALLOW THE
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.170/355-359/2016 FILED BY THE
PETITIONERS BEFORE THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE
TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU, AND GRANT ALL CONSEQUENTIAL
RELIEFS AND BENEFITS, AND ETC.
4
IN W.P. NO.8791/2020:
BETWEEN:
1. UMA PRASHANTH
D/O. LATE PUTTANNAIAH L.S.,
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
WORKING AS SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
ACB, MANGALORE AND WESTERN RANGE,
BANGALORE, SOBHA CITY APARTMENT,
THANISANDRA MAIN ROAD,
R.K. HEGDE NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 077.
2. SMT. YASHODHA VANTAGODI
W/O. SUNIL VANTAGODI,
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
WORKING AS DCP,
CRIME AND TRAFFIC DIVISION,
BELGAUM.
3. SRIHARI BARGUR ALIAS SRIHARIBABU B.L.
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,
S/O. B.M. LINGANNA,
WORKING AS ADSP,
RAICHUR DISTRICT.
4. SMT. GEETHA PRASANNA ALIAS GEETHA M.S.
W/O. PRASANNA,
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO.702,
10TH CROSS, VINAYA MARGA,
SIDDHARATHANAGAR,
MYSURU - 570 011,
WORKING AS SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
DCRE CELL,
MYSURU.
5. DR. SHOBHARANI V.J.
D/O. JAGANNATH,
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
WORKING AS ADSP,
TUMKUR DISTRICT.
5
6. DR. SOUMYALATHA S.K.
W/O. SUSHEEN DUTT H.K.,
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
WORKING AS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE,
TRAFFIC WEST DIVISION,
BANGALORE.
7. SMT. KAVITHA B.T.
W/O. NAGASHAYANA,
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
WORKING AS DCP, CRIME AND TRAFFIC,
MYSURU.
... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI SHASHI KIRAN SHETTY, SENIOR COUNSEL,
ALONG WITH SRI SHAMANTH NAIK, ADV.)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY,
KARNATAKA GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA
DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL
AND ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS,
KARNATAKA GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
3. UNION OF INDIA
BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL,
PUBLIC GRIEVANCES AND PENSION,
NORTH BLOCK,
NEW DELHI - 110 001.
4. UNION PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
DHOLPUR HOUSE,
NEW DELHI - 110 001,
BY ITS SECRETARY.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI S.S. MAHENDRA, A.G.A., FOR R-1 & 2;
SRI S.K. ACHARYA, ADV., FOR R-3)
6
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
ORDER DATED 21-6-2019 PASSED BY THE CENTRAL
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE BENCH, BANGALORE
IN ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.170/00365-377/2016 AT
ANNEXURE-A, AND ETC.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE COMING ON FOR ORDERS,
THIS DAY, SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The present writ petitions are arising out of order
dated 21-6-2019 passed in four original applications
preferred by the Karnataka State Civil Police Officers being
aggrieved by order dated 23-1-2016 passed by the State
Government in terms of Regulation II (j) and (k) which
provides for issuance of equivalency order.
2. The equivalency order has been issued by the
State of Karnataka on 23-1-2016 holding the Assistant
Commandants of Karnataka State Reserve Police as
equivalent to Deputy Superintendent of Police (State Civil
Police Services). The matter was heard by the Central
Administrative Tribunal, Bengaluru, (for short, 'the
Tribunal') and judgment has been delivered which is
running into 142 pages. The Tribunal has dismissed the
original applications holding the validity of order dated
23-1-2016. However, for upholding the validity of order
dated 23-1-2016, reference finds place only in paragraph
No.23 mean thereby after writing 142 pages, only one
paragraph deals with order dated 23-1-2016.
3. Paragraph Nos.23 to 26 of the order passed in the
Original Applications reads as under:
"23. Since the Hon'ble Apex Court has laid
down the law on the subject, we hereby
declare:
a) The Karnataka Legislature has
the jurisdiction and competence to
enact and amend Section 3 of the
Karnataka Police Act as it stands
today.
b) In consequence thereof there is
only one police force in the State of
Karnataka including the State
Reserve Police Force established
under Section 145.
c) All the officers of Karnataka
Police, in all streams of policing of
the rank of Dy. SP and above with a
minimum service of eight years and
qualified as per the rules are eligible
to be considered for promotion into
the Indian Police Service.
d) As ordered in WP. No.3269/2012
dtd.25.4.2013 by the Hon'ble High
Court of Karnataka vide sub-para-vii
of para-71 'the Government decision
should contain the reasons either for
granting equivalence or refusing to
grant equivalence so that the
aggrieved person could agitate his
rights before this Court'. The order of
the Govt. of Karnataka at Annexure-
A27, GO No. DPAR 155 SPS 2013
dtd.23.01.2016 while ordering the
inclusion of the Assistant
Commandants of KSRP as
equivalent to Civil Police Services for
the purpose of promotion to Indian
Police Service, does not contain any
reason as ordered by the Hon'ble
High Court of Karnataka for not
ordering the equivalence of the other
police service officers of the police
force of the State of Karnataka.
e) As already noted, as per Section 3
of the Karnataka Police Act, there is
only one police force in the State of
Karnataka and as such leaving out
certain other categories without any
valid reason by the Government vide
impugned order is not correct.
Therefore, there shall be a mandate
to the Govt. of Karnataka to specify
the reasons for not including the
other police service officers for being
eligible to be promoted to the Indian
Police Service. The validity of order
at Annexure-A27 is otherwise
upheld.
24. We, however, make it clear that this
equivalence as established by the statute shall
only be extendable to the officers recruited into
the various branches of the State Police
Service based on their minimum qualifications
and recruitment through a common
standardised process.
25. In view of the various proceedings before
this Tribunal as well as the Hon'ble High Court
of Karnataka and the decision taken by the
Govt. of Karnataka vide order at Annexure-
A27, it is clarified that the orders shall take
effect only from the date of the impugned
order. The OAs.No.355-359/2016, 362-
364/2016, 365-377/2016 are disposed off as
above. No costs.
26. Regarding OAs.No.631-635/2017, as
stated by the respondents, the application is
filed against the internal communications
between the Government and the DG & IG of
Police. The respondents have no other option
except to follow the various orders and
guidelines relating to the crucial date for
inclusion in the select list etc., which are all
well established. This they shall do
accordingly and therefore these OAs stand
dismissed."
4. Most unfortunate aspect of the case is that, there
was no prayer for declaring other Police Services in the
State of Karnataka as equivalent to the Karnataka Police
Civil Services and in spite of aforesaid, direction has been
given to treat all the Officers in Karnataka in the rank of
Deputy Superintendent of Police and above in all streams
with a minimum service of eight years and qualified as per
the rules are eligible to be considered for promotion into
the post of Indian Police Service. The Tribunal has issued
a mandamus to the State of Karnataka to consider Officers
of other Police services in Karnataka also. The State of
Karnataka has other four Police services.
5. In the considered opinion of this Court, the
Tribunal should have gone in detail in respect of the
impugned order dated 23-1-2016 and should have decided
the matter on merits, after considering all rival
contentions of the parties. The same has certainly not
been done. With the consent of the parties, matter is
being remanded back to the Tribunal to decide afresh in
accordance with law that too after affording opportunity of
hearing to the parties. There are certain interveners also
in the present case and therefore, interveners are
permitted to file intervention application before the
Tribunal.
6. At this juncture, learned counsel for the
petitioners has argued before this Court that the State is
going to send a list of Deputy Superintendent of Police
serving under Karnataka Civil Police and their interest is
going to be hampered, if such a list is sent.
7. Learned Government Advocate has stated before
this Court that for a period of thirty days, the entire
process shall be kept in abeyance.
8. Resultantly, without averting into the merits of
the case, the matter is remanded back to the Tribunal for
deciding it afresh on merits in accordance with law.
Parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on
8-2-2021. No further notice is required as all parties are
present before this Court and even, interveners are
present. With the aforesaid directions, writ petitions
stand disposed of.
9. It is further made clear that the Tribunal will not
grant any adjournment in the matter and the parties shall
co-operate with the final hearing of the matter and in case,
any necessity for grant of adjournment arises, the
Tribunal shall record reasons for such an adjournment.
10. All pending interlocutory applications also stand
disposed of.
No order as to costs.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
kvk
