Shri.Shivasharana Haralayya ... vs Thimmangouda Basanagouda Goudar
2021 Latest Caselaw 153 Kant

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                 DHARWAD BENCH

     DATED THIS THE 5 T H DAY OF JANUARY, 2021
                            BEFORE
 THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.S. SANJAY GOWDA

       WRIT PETITION NO. 146997/2020 (EDN-RES)


Between:
1.     Shri Shivasharana Haralayya
       Institution Kamatagi,
       Rep. by its President,
       Shri C.B. Padagannavar,
       Anjana Nilaya, Opp.: UKP Colony,
       Ilakal, Hunagund Taluk,
       Bagalkot District - 587118.
2.     Head Master,
       Shri Konnammadevi Secondary School,
       Bhagavati Bagalkot Taluk,
       And District Bagalkot - 587101.
                                                    ... Petitioners
(By Shri Rohit S. Patil, Advocate)


And:
Thimmangouda Basangouda Goudar
Since deceased by his L.Rs.
1.     Rajeshwari W/o.Timmangouda Goudar,
       Goudar, Age 59 years, Occ: Household work,
       R/o.: Bhagawati Bagalkot Taluk,
       Bagalkot District - 587 101.
2.     Shashikala W/o. Mahantesh Biradar,
       Age 32 years, Occ: Household work,
       R/o.: Nidagundi B Bageadi Taluk-586203.
3.     Vijalaxmi W/o.Shantagouda Patil,
                                   :2:



     Age 29 years, Occ: Household work,
     R/o.: Hiremagi, Hunagund Taluk,
     Dist.: Bagalkot-587118.
4.   Basangouda S/o.Timmangouda Goudar,
     Age 28 years, Occ: Private Job,
     R/o.: Bhagawati Bagalkot,
     Taluk and District - 587101.
5.   Abhishek S/o.Timmangouda Goudar,
     Age 22 years, Occ: Student,
     R/o.: Bagalkot
     Taluk and District - 587101.
6.   The State of Karnataka,
     R/by its Secretary Department of
     Education, Government of Karnataka,
     M.S. Building, Bengaluru-530068.
7.   The Additional Commissioner for
     Public Instructions, Dharwad.
8.   The Deputy Director of Public Instructions,
     Navanagar, Bagalkot-587 101.
9.   The Block Education Officer,
     Public Education Department,
     Navanagar, Bagalkot-587 101.
                                                   ... Respondents
(By Shri V.S. Kalasurmath, HCGP for R6 to R9;
 Smt.Veena Hegde, Advocate for R1 to R5 )


     This writ p etition is filed und er Articles 226 and
227 of the Constitution of Ind ia, praying to a writ of
certiorari    to   q uash   the    judgment   p assed    in   EAT
No.3/2016, d ated 29.01.2020 on the Prl. District and
Sessions Judge, Bagalkot vide Annexure-G in the ends
of justice.


     This petition coming on for preliminary hearing B-group,
this day, the Court made the following:
                                    :3:



                                  ORDER

1. The husb and of the first respond ent and the

father of respondent Nos.2 to 5 was dismissed from

service pursuant to an enq uiry conducted against him

by the p etitioner - Institution.

2. The petitioner - Institution alleged that

Thimmangouda Basangoud a Goud ar was guilty of

disbursing cheques to the meritorious SC/ST

cand id ates after collecting a sum of Rs.1,000/- illegally

from them and Thimmangoud a Basangoud a Goud ar was

also remiss in taking over charge and handing over

charg e from the Head Master.

3. In the enquiry conducted by the institution,

the Enquiry Officer submitted a report that all the

charg es ag ainst Thimmangoud a Basangoud a Goud ar had

been proved.

4. On the b asis of the enquiry report, after

issuing show cause notice to Thimmangouda

Basangoud a Goud ar, the petitioner Institution

proceeded to terminate his service.

5. Being agg rieved by the said ord er of

termination, Thimmangoud a Basangoud a Goud ar

preferred an app eal under Section 94 of the Karnataka

Education Act to the Ed ucation Appellate Trib unal.

6. The Tribunal on consid eration of the entire

matter and on app reciation of the evid ence adduced

before it, came to the conclusion that the appellant had

proved that his services had been illeg ally terminated

by an ord er d ated 17.07.2016. In ord er to come to the

said conclusion, the Tribunal observed that the

Petitioner-Institution had failed to examine or record

the statement of even a single stud ent to the effect

that they had paid Rs.1,000/- to Thimmangouda

Basangoud a Goudar while receiving cheques.

7. The Tribunal also rejected the claim of the

petitioner Institution that Thimmangoud a Basangouda

Goudar had admitted that he had collected Rs.1,000/-

as ind icated in Ex.R7. The Tribunal noticed that even

und er Ex.R7 Thimmangoud a Basangoud a Goud ar had

not ad mitted that he had delivered the cheques after

collecting the bribe money of Rs.1,000/- and on the

basis of the said alleged admission it could not have

been held that the charg e against him had been p roved .

The Appellate Tribunal accord ing ly accepted the appeal

and p roceed ed to set aside the order of termination.

8. However, since Thimmangoud a Basangouda

Goudar had passed away during the pendency of the

app eal, instead of ordering reinstatement, the Tribunal

proceeded to hold that his leg al heirs would be entitled

to all the service benefits that Thimmangoud a

Basangoud a Goudar would be entitled too.

9. It is this ord er that is imp ugned in this writ

petition by the institution.

10. Admitted ly, the principal charge ag ainst the

deceased Thimmangouda Basangoud a Goud ar was that

he had collected Rs.1,000/- from each of the students

before disb ursing the cheques. Admittedly as noticed by

the tribunal not a sing le student was examined to

substantiate this alleg ation. It is to be noticed here that

this contention of accep ting a sum of Rs.1,000/- could

have b een estab lished only if the students, who had

complained about p ayment of Rs.1,000/- had been

examined either during the course of enquiry or

otherwise or in any other p roceed ings. Since there was

absolutely no cred ible evid ence to indicate that

Thimmangouda Basangoud a Goudar had collected the

said sum of Rs.1,000/-, the tribunal, in my view, was

perfectly justified in coming to the conclusion that the

ord er of termination was illegal and could not be

sustained.

11. As far as the contention that Thimmangouda

Basangoud a Goudar had admitted that he had received

Rs.1,000/- as evid enced by Ex.R7 is concerned , the

Tribunal has rightly held that in Ex.R7, the

Thimmangouda Basangoud a Goudar had not admitted

that he had collected a sum of Rs.1,000/- and he had

only stated that Shri C.S. Phanib and, Head Maser of the

institution, during the period of his casual leave, had

instructed him to disburse the cheque b y collecting

Rs.1,000/-. The Tribunal noticed that in Ex R-7, he had

no where ad mitted that he had complied with the said

instructions and collected the said sum of Rs.1,000/-

and therefore on the b asis of Ex.R7 it could not b e held

that there was an ad mission ab out any wrong doing.

This view by the app ellate Tribunal cannot b e said to be

in p erverse or cap ricious calling for interference und er

Art 227 of the Constitution. I therefore find no reason

to interfere with the ord er of the app ellate Tribunal and

accord ing ly I dismiss this writ p etition as being devoid

of merits.

SD/-

JUDGE Vnp*