IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO.35180 OF 2018 (S-RES) BETWEEN CHANDRAPPA S/O CHANDAPPA AGE 46 YEARS, CHIEF OFFICER TOWN PANCHAYATH HOLALKERE CHITRADURGA R/AT MUNICIPAL QUARTERS IUDP LAYOUT, 5TH CROSS, CHITRADURGA - 577 501.
... PETITIONER (BY SRI RAJENDRA DESAI, ADVOCATE) AND 1.STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001.
2.KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTHA M.S.BUILDING DR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE - 560 001. REP. BY REGISTRAR 3.SRI R KRISHNAMURTHY S/O LATE RAMAPPA AGED MAJOR RESIDING AT HOLALKERE TOWN CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 577 526 4.B R SUJATHA AGED MAJOR W/O R KRISHNAMURTHY R/AT HOLALKERE TOWN CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 577 526 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.M.S.PRATHIMA, AGA FOR R1) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER INITIATING THE CONTEMPLATING OF INQUIRY AGAINST THE PETITIONER BY THE STATE GOVERNMENT VIDE ITS ORDER DTD 21.03.2017 VIDE ANNX-L AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER R.DEVDAS J., (ORAL):
Learned AGA takes notice for respondent No.1. Notice to the other respondents is not necessary.
2. The petitioner is the Chief Officer of Town Panchayath, Holalkere Town, Chitradurga. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 21.03.2017 issued by the first respondent-State Government, empowering the second respondent to conduct an enquiry in terms of Rule 14-A of the Karnataka Civil Services (Classification, Control And Appeal) Rules, 1957 and the articles of charges issued by the second respondent consequent to the entrustment of the enquiry to the second respondent.
3. Learned AGA submits that the petition is premature, since the petitioner has approached this Court challenging the Articles of charges issued by the second respondent which is in accordance with law.
4. Learned AGA relies upon a judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Secretary, Ministry of Defence and Others Vs. Prabhash Chandra Mirdha reported in (2012) 11 SCC 565. In the said case, their Lordships have held that ordinarily a writ petition does not lie against a charge-sheet or show-cause notice for the reason that it does not give rise to any cause of action. It does not amount to an adverse order which affects the right of any party unless the same has been issued by a person having no jurisdiction/competent authority to do so. It has also been held that mere issuance of charge sheet does not infringe the right of a party. It is only when a final order dismissing the punishment or otherwise adversely affecting a party is passed, it may have a grievance and cause of action.
5. In the light of the above, it is seen that the petitioner has approached this Court on issuance of articles of charge. The petitioner is required to answer the charges made against him and it is not permissible for this Court to interfere at this stage.
6. Therefore, the petition requires to be dismissed and it is accordingly dismissed.
SD/- JUDGE JT/-