Karnataka High Court
Shri. Shankar Alias Shankarappa vs The Divisional Controller / on 27 July, 2023
Bench: S.Vishwajith Shetty
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:7883
WP No. 104389 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JULY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
WRIT PETITION NO. 104389 OF 2023 (S-KSRTC)
C/W
WRIT PETITION NO. 104392 OF 2023 (S-KSRTC)
WRIT PETITION NO. 104462 OF 2023 (S-KSRTC)
IN WP NO.104389/2023:
BETWEEN:
SHRI. SHANKAR ALIAS SHANKARAPPA
S/O. RAMAPPA MADAR, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, OCC.
ASSISTANT TRAFFIC INSPECTOR (ATI), KKRTC,
HARAPANAHALLI DEPOT, HOSAPETE DIVISION-583201.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. RAVI HEGDE & SRI.VINAYKUMAR BHAT, ADVOCATES)
AND:
VISHAL
NINGAPPA 1. THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER /
PATTIHAL DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY, KKRTC, HOSAPETE DIVISION,
Digitally signed by HOSAPETE, DIST. BALLARI-583201
VISHAL NINGAPPA
PATTIHAL
2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR /
Date: 2023.07.28
13:22:01 +0530 APPELLATE AUTHORITY, KKRTC, CENTRAL OFFICE, SARIGE
SADANA, MAIN ROAD,
KALABURAGI-585105.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.PRASHANT HOSMANI, ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO A)ISSUE WRIT OF
CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR ORDER QUASHING THE ORDER
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:7883
WP No. 104389 of 2023
PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 DATED 29.9.2021, BEARING
NO.KA.KA.RA.SA/HOO.VI/SHISTU/ 1340/21/2834/20-21, ANNEXURE-C
AND ORDER DATED 3.01.2022, BEARING
NO.KA.KA.SA/KE.KA/SHISTU/ME.MA/ 134/2021/637/2021, PASSED BY
THE 2ND RESPONDENT, VIDE ANNEXURE-E, AND; B) CONSEQUENT
UPON QUASHING THE AFORESAID ORDER, ISSUE WRIT OF MANDAMUS
DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO RELEASE THE BENEFITS PURSUANT
TO THE QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDERS, BY FIXING OUTER LIMIT.
IN WP NO.104392/2023:
BETWEEN:
SHRI. SHANKAR ALIAS SHANKARAPPA
S/O. RAMAPPA MADAR, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
OCC. ASSISTANT TRAFFIC INSPECTOR (ATI),
KKRTC, HARAPANAHALLI DEPOT,
HOSAPETE DIVISION-583201.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. RAVI HEGDE & VINAYKUMAR BHAT, ADVOCATES)
AND:
1. THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER /
DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY
KKRTC, HOSAPETE DIVISION,
HOSAPETE, DIST. BALLARI-583201.
2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR /
APPELLATE AUTHORITY,
KKRTC, CENTRAL OFFICE,
SARIGE SADANA, MAIN ROAD,
KALABURAGI-585105.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.PRASHANT HOSMANI, ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO A)ISSUE WRIT OF
CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR ORDER QUASHING THE ORDER
PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 DATED 29.9.2021, BEARING
NO.KA.KA.RA.SA/HOO.VI/SHISTU/ 1342A/21/2835/20-21, ANNEXURE-B
AND ORDER DATED 3.01.2022, BEARING
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:7883
WP No. 104389 of 2023
NO.KA.KA.SA/KE.KA/SHISTU/ME.MA/ 133/2021/636/2021, PASSED BY
THE 2ND RESPONDENT, VIDE ANNEXURE-D, AND; B) CONSEQUENT
UPON QUASHING THE AFORESAID ORDER, ISSUE WRIT OF MANDAMUS
DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO RELEASE THE BENEFITS PURSUANT
TO THE QUASHING OF THE IMPUGNED ORDERS, BY FIXING OUTER
LIMIT.
IN WP NO.104462/2023:
BETWEEN:
1. SHRI. SHANKAR ALIAS SHANKARAPPA S/O RAMAPPA
MADAR,
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
OCC. ASSISTANT TRAFFIC INSPECTOR
(ATI), KKRTC., HARAPANAHALLI DEPOT,
HOSAPETE DIVISION-583201.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. RAVI HEGDE & VINAYKUMAR BHAT, ADVOCATES)
AND:
1. THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER /DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY,
NEKRTC (PRESENTLY KKRTC), HOSAPETE DIVISION,
HOSAPETE, DIST. BALLARI-583201.
2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR/APPELLANT AUTHORITY,
NEKRTC (PRESENTLY KKRTC), CENTRAL OFFICE,
SARIGE SADANAM MAIN ROAD,
KALABURAGI-585105
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.PRASHANT HOSMANI, ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO A)ISSUE WRIT OF
CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR ORDER QUASHING THE ORDER
PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 DATED 28.01.2021, BEARING
NO.NEKRTC/HOO.VI/SHISTU/878/20/432/2021, ANNEXURE-B AND
ORDER DATED. 3.01.2022, BEARING
NO.KA.KA.SA/KE.KA/SHISTU/ME.MA/127/2021/635/2021, PASSED BY
THE 2ND RESPONDENT, VIDE ANNEXURE-C, AND; B)CONSEQUENT
UPON QUASHING THE AFORESAID ORDER, ISSUE WRIT OF MANDAMUS
DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO RELEASE THE BENEFITS PURSUANT
TO QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDERS, BY FIXING OUTER LIMIT.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR RPELIMINARY HEARING, THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
-4-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:7883
WP No. 104389 of 2023
ORDER
1. The issue involved in these writ petitions are
common and therefore with the consent of the learned
counsel appearing for the parties, the petitions are heard
together and disposed of by this common order.
2. The petitioner is the employee of the
respondent-Corporation. Charge sheet was issued to him
regarding certain misconduct and thereafter without
holding any inquiry, order of punishment imposing minor
punishment was passed by the Disciplinary Authority.
Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner had
approached the 2nd respondent-Appellate Authority who
had modified the order of punishment. Being not satisfied
with the same, the petitioner is before this Court.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the Disciplinary Authority had passed an order of
punishment without holding an inquiry. Even if the
Disciplinary Authority decides passing minor punishment,
holding of an inquiry is mandatory and the same cannot be
NC: 2023:KHC-D:7883
WP No. 104389 of 2023
dispensed with. He also submits that no reasons have
been assigned by the Disciplinary Authority for dispensing
with holding of inquiry. In support of his contentions, he
has placed reliance on the judgment of the division bench
of this court in Writ Appeal No.100217/2018 disposed of
on 27.02.2019 and also in the order passed by this Court
in Writ Petition No.112753/2014 disposed of on
13.07.2023.
4. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the
respondents has argued in support of the impugned order
and submits that since minor punishment was imposed on
the petitioner, no inquiry has been held. He also submits
that the matter could be remitted to the Disciplinary
Authority for passing fresh orders in the event this Court
arrives at a conclusion that an inquiry was mandatory
before passing any order of punishment.
5. Undisputed facts of the case are that, on the
allegation of misconduct charge sheet was issued to the
petitioner by the respondents and thereafter without
NC: 2023:KHC-D:7883
WP No. 104389 of 2023
holding an inquiry order of punishment was passed by the
Disciplinary Authority. The Division Bench of this Court in
Writ Appeal No.100217/2018 in almost identical
circumstances has held that before imposition of any
penalty against an employee, compliance of principles of
natural justice is a must. In the said case, the Division
Bench has also observed that even if the Disciplinary
Authority decides to dispense holding of an inquiry before
imposition of penalty, valid reasons are to be assigned for
the same.
6. In the present case, from the perusal of the
material on record, it is seen that the Disciplinary
Authority has assigned no reasons for dispensing with
holding of inquiry before passing the order of punishment
against the petitioner. Placing reliance on the aforesaid
judgment of the Division Bench in Writ Appeal
No.100217/2018, this Court in Writ Petition
No.112753/2014 disposed of on 13.07.2023, had quashed
the order of punishment and had directed the respondents
NC: 2023:KHC-D:7883
WP No. 104389 of 2023
to work out monetary benefits for which the petitioner
would be entitled and settle the same.
7. Though the learned counsel for the respondents
has made an alternative prayer to remit the matter to the
Disciplinary Authority for passing fresh orders, after
complying with the requirements of law, I am not inclined
to remit the matter for two reasons; firstly; though this
Court has been setting aside similar orders passed by the
respondent-Corporation, for the last more than 5 years,
the respondent-Corporation and its Officers have
continued to pass orders of punishment without holding an
inquiry and secondly; the charges levelled against the
petitioner is not very serious. Under the circumstances,
placing reliance on the judgment of the Division Bench of
this Court in Writ Appeal No.100217/2018 disposed of on
27.02.2019 and in the background of the orders passed in
Writ Petition No.112753/2014 disposed of on 13.07.2022,
I am of the considered view that these writ petitions are
required to be allowed. Accordingly, the following:
NC: 2023:KHC-D:7883
WP No. 104389 of 2023
ORDER
Writ petitions are allowed. The order of punishment
passed by the respondent No.1-Disciplinary Authority
against the petitioner is quashed. The respondents are
directed to settle the monetary benefits which are denied
to the petitioner in view of the order of punishment, at the
earliest, but not later than a period of three months from
the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
Sd/-
JUDGE
KGK
