Karnataka High Court
Sri Nagappa Appanna Singi vs The Union Of India on 28 May, 2024
Author: B M Shyam Prasad
Bench: B M Shyam Prasad
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:17949
WP No. 42807 of 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF MAY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 42807 OF 2012 (S-RES)
BETWEEN:
SRI NAGAPPA APPANNA SINGI
S/O LATE A B SINGI
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS
ADDITIONAL REGIONAL OFFICER
CENTRAL BOARD OF FILM
CERTIFICATION, KOLKATA
NOW R/A NO.21, CHOWDESHWARI TEMPLE LANE
1ST MAIN, 2ND CROSS
RAMAIAH LAYOUT, S G PALYA
BANGALORE-560029.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI.K. SREERAM., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally
signed by
NARASIMHA 1. THE UNION OF INDIA
MURTHY
VANAMALA REP BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVT
Location: MINISTRY OF INFORMATION
HIGH COURT
OF AND BROADCASTING
KARNATAKA
SHASTRI BHAVAN
BANGALORE-110001.
2. THE UNDER SECRETARY TO
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF INFORMATION
AND BROADCASTING
SHASTRI BHAVAN
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:17949
WP No. 42807 of 2012
BANGALORE-110001.
3. THE CHAIRPERSON
CENTRAL BOARD OF FILM
CERTIFICATION, BHARAT BHAVAN
WALKESHWAR ROAD
MUMBAI-400006.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. UNNIKRISHNA M, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2
R3 SERVED )
THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTIFLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO REGULARIZE THE
ENTIRE PERIOD OF SUSPENSION AS ONE OF DUTIES
FOR ALL PURPOSES, PAY & ALLOWANCES,
INCREMENTS AND ALSO FOR PENSIONARY BENEFITS
IN VIEW OF SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT OF TRIAL
COURT IN SPL. C.C. NO.62/2002 BY THE HON'BLE
HIGH COURT IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.462/2004 VIDE
ANNEXURE-S; DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO
RELEASE HIS PAY AND ALLOWANCES FROM THE DATE
OF SUSPENSION TILL THE DATE OF SUPERANNUATION
AND ALSO WORK OUT HIS PENSIONARY BENEFITS
ACCORDINGLY AND RELEASE THE SAME.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING,
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:17949
WP No. 42807 of 2012
ORDER
The petitioner, who was in service with the
Central Board of Film Certification [the third
respondent], has inter alia sought for directions to
regularise his services for the period during which he
was kept under suspension for the purposes of pay
and allowances and for release of payment of different
allowances while impugning the conclusion of the
departmental proceedings with the dismissal order
dated 9.12.2005. The petitioner has pitched his case
for these directions based on this Court's judgment
dated 04.07.2011 in Criminal Appeal No.462/2004.
2. This Court, while considering the
petitioner's appeal as against the judgment dated
22.03.2004 in Special Case No.62/2002 before the
competent Special Court for the offences punishable
under the different provisions of the Prevention of
Corruption Act, 1988, has allowed the appeal and set
aside the order of conviction and sentence. However,
Sri Sri K. Sreeram, the learned counsel for the
NC: 2024:KHC:17949
petitioner, fairly submits that the Hon'ble Supreme
Court, while considering the appeal filed by the
prosecution against this Court's judgement in the
aforesaid criminal appeal, has restored the conviction
and sentence. In fact, the learned counsel is
categorical that in the turn of events the petitioner
would confine the grievance to his claim for
subsistence allowance during the period which he
was kept under suspension and would not press the
petition for the other reliefs.
3. Sri K. Sreeram submits that the petitioner
was initially kept under suspension on 04.04.2002
for a period of six months and thereafter the
suspension is extended every six months until the
conclusion of the departmental proceedings resulting
in termination of service by the impugned order dated
09.12.2005 and that the petitioner, notwithstanding
the allegations that have resulted finally in conviction
and sentence, would be entitled for subsistence
NC: 2024:KHC:17949
allowance for a limited purpose. The learned counsel
submits that in fact, the petitioner has filed a
representation with the second respondent enclosing
all the materials for subsistence allowance.
4. The learned counsel for the respondents
are heard in the light of this submission, and this
Court is of the view that given the length of time for
which this petition is pending and the categorical
assertion that the petitioner's request for subsistence
allowance during the period which he was kept under
suspension is not considered either for rejection or
acceptance, the petition must be disposed of
reserving liberty to the petitioner to pursue his
representation filed with the second respondent along
with the certified copy of this order observing that the
second respondent must consider the request and
communicate the decision without any room for
further litigation.
NC: 2024:KHC:17949
The petition stands disposed of accordingly.
SD/-
JUDGE
SA
ct:sr
