Karnataka High Court
Shri. Shridhar S/O Irappa Bandi vs The State Of Karnataka on 25 May, 2023
Bench: S.Vishwajith Shettypresided Bysvsj
-1-
WP No. 101092 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF MAY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
WRIT PETITION NO. 101092 OF 2021 (S-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. SHRI. SHRIDHAR S/O IRAPPA BANDI,
AGE: 37 YEARS,
OCC: DISMISSED EMPLOYEE OF THE PATTAN
PANCHAYAT AMINAGAD,
R/O. NEAR BASAVESWAR TEMPLE,
WARD NO.5, AMINAGAD,
TALUK: HUNAGUND, DIST: BAGALKOT,
PIN: 587101.
2. SHRI. IRANNA S/O KASHAPPA TELAGADE,
AGE: 37 YEARS,
OCC: DISMISSED EMPLOYEES OF THE PATTAN
PANCHAYAT, AMINAGAD,
Digitally R/O. KSDC COLONY WARD NO.2, AMINAGAD,
signed by
RAKESH S TALUK: HUNAGUND, DIST: BAGALKOT.
HARIHAR
RAKESH Location: PIN: 587101.
High Court
S of Karnataka, ... PETITIONERS
HARIHAR Dharwad
Date: (BY SRI. SHIVARAJ P MUDHOL, ADVOCATE)
2023.05.30
11:21:09
+0530
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT URBAN DEVELOPMENT,
M.S. BUILDING, BANGALURU,
PIN: 560001.
2. THE DIRECTOR OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION,
VISVESWAR TOWER, AMBEDKAR VEEDI,
-2-
WP No. 101092 of 2021
BANGALURU, PIN: 560001.
3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
BAGALKOT, DISTRICT: BAGALKOT,
PIN: 587101.
4. THE PROJECT DIRECTOR,
OFFICE OF DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
BAGALKOT-587101.
5. THE ZILLA PANCHAYAT, BAGALKOT,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
AT: BAGALKOT, DIST: BAGALKOT,
PI: 587101.
6. THE TALUKA PANCHAYAT, HUNAGUND,
REPRESENTED BY EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
AT: HUNAGUND, TALUK: HUNAGUND,
DIST: BAGALKOT, PIN: 587101.
7. THE PATTAN PANCHAYAT, AMINAGAD,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF OFFICER,
AT: AMINAGAD, TQ: HUNAGUND,
DIST: BAGALKOT, PIN: 587101.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. VINAYAK S KULKARNI, AGA FOR R1-R4;
SRI. H R DESHPANDE, ADVOCATE FOR R7;
SRI. BHUSHAN KULKARNI, ADVOCATE FOR R5 & R6)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO
ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE
IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 2/4/2019 IN NO.PAPUMA/
SIBBANDI/ A.E NOU/ VAJA/ 2019-20/928 PASSED BY THE 7TH
RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-L & ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
-3-
WP No. 101092 of 2021
ORDER
The petitioners who were the employees of the 7th
respondent Pattan Panchayat have approached this Court in
this writ petition with a prayer to quash the order Annexure - L
dated 02.04.2019 passed by the 7th respondent and direct the
said respondent to reinstate the petitioners with all
consequential benefits. The petitioners have also sought a
direction to the 5TH respondent to consider the claim of the
petitioners to approve their appointment as similar employees
claim has been approved vide Annexure - M and to extend the
similar benefits even to the petitioners.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and
the learned counsels for the respondents and also perused the
material on record.
3. The petitioners were appointed to the post of Bill
Collectors of Amingad Gram Panchayat on temporary basis.
Subsequently, the said Gram Panchayat was upgraded as
Pattan Panchayat and the employees of the Gram Panchayat
including the petitioners were continued in service of Pattan
Panchayat. On the allegation that the petitioners were
WP No. 101092 of 2021
unauthorisedly absent from duty, the 7th respondent had issued
notices as per Annexures - G, H and J series calling upon the
petitioners to report to duty failing which appropriate legal
action would be taken against them. Inspite of service of the
said notices, the petitioners allegedly had not reported to duty
nor had they replied to the notices which were issued to them
by the 7th respondent. The 7th respondent therefore had sought
opinion / clarification from the 4th respondent, who in turn had
issued a communication to the 7th respondent to discharge the
petitioners from duty in accordance with law. Thereafter, the
7th respondent has issued the impugned order at Annexure - L
dated 02.04.2019 dismissing the petitioners from service on
the ground of unauthorized absence. It is under these
circumstances, the petitioners are before this Court.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners were not given an opportunity of being heard before
passing the impugned order. He submits that the order of
dismissal vide Annexure - L has been passed by the 7th
respondent without holding any enquiry which is not
permissible in law. In support of his contention, he places
reliance on the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this
WP No. 101092 of 2021
Court in the case of The Managing Director vs. Basappa S/o.
Shivappa Kavadi in W.A. No.100217/2018 disposed of on
27.02.2019.
5. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the 7th
respondent submits that the petitioners are not the regular
employees of the 7th respondent. Though repeated notices were
issued to the petitioners, they have failed to respond to the
same. Inspite of service of notice, they had neither reported to
the duty nor issued any reply to the notice and therefore the 7th
respondent was constrained to issue the order of dismissal as
per annexure - L. He submits that since the petitioners are not
the regular employees, no enquiry is required to be held
against them. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss the writ petition.
6. The material on record would go to show that the
petitioners who were earlier working as Bill Collectors in the
Gram Panchayat were subsequently continued in service in the
7th respondent Pattan Panchayat after the up-gradation of the
Gram Panchayat into Pattan Panchayat. On the allegation of
unauthorized absent, the 7th respondent has issued notices to
the petitioners vide Annexures - G, H and J series calling upon
WP No. 101092 of 2021
the petitioners to report to duty and in the said notices, it was
mentioned that in the event the petitioners fail to report,
appropriate action will be taken against them in accordance
with law. Annexures - K and K1 are the replies given by the
petitioners to the notices issued by the 7th respondent.
However, thereafter, without their being any enquiry against
the petitioners and without even granting an opportunity of
being heard in the matter, the impugned order at Annexure - L
came to be quashed dismissing the petitioners from service.
Since notices were issued asking petitioners to report to duty it
cannot be said they are not the regular employees of the
respondent. Any order of punishment which has been passed in
violation of the principles of natural justice cannot be sustained.
The Division Bench of this Court in the case of The Managing
Director vs. Basappa S/o. Shivappa Kavadi in W.A.
No.100217/2018 disposed of on 27.02.2019 has held
imposition of penalty without compliance of the principles of
natural justice inasmuch as no inquiry or hearing whatsoever is
unsustainable. Under the circumstances, the order at
Annexure - L passed by the 7th respondent is liable to be
quashed. Accordingly, the following order.
WP No. 101092 of 2021
The writ petition is partly allowed.
The impugned order at Annexure - L dated 02.04.2019
passed by the 7th respondent is quashed. The petitioners shall
be reinstated with continuity of service, however, since the
petitioners have remained absent inspite of repeated notices
issued by the 7th respondent asking them to report to duty,
they are not entitled for any backwages.
Liberty is reserved to the 7th respondent to hold enquiry
against the petitioners on the alleged charges and proceed
against them in accordance with law if they so desire.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Rsh/Ct:Bck
