IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF JULY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI WRIT PETITION NO.55936 OF 2015 (S-DIS) BETWEEN:
SMT. GIRIJAMMA D/O LATE MADHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/O WADDARAHALLI, CHOTTANHALLI (P), MALAVALLI (TALUK), MANDYA DISTRICT. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. K. S. GIRIJA, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC LIBRARY, VISHVESHWARAIAH TOWER, BENGALURU-560 001.
2. THE CHIEF LIBRARIAN DISTRICT LIBRARY, MANDYA DISTRICT-571 401.
3. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER ZILLA PANCHAYAT, SUVARNA SOUDHA, MANDYA-571 401.
4. THE PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER GRAMA PANCHAYATH, MAREHALLI GRAMA PANCHAYATH, MALAVALLI TALUK, MANDYA-571 401. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SREEDHAR N. HEGDE, HCGP FOR R-1 & R-2; R-3 & R-4 SERVED BUT UNREPRESENTED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED MEMORANDUM / ORDER DTD.05.08.2014 ISSUED BY THE R-2 VIDE ANNX-D BY ISSUING WRIT OF CERTIORARI AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R In the instant petition, the petitioner has sought for quashing the order dated 05.08.2014 (Annexure-D), by which the petitioner’s service has been dispensed in termination.
2. The petitioner was appointed as a Supervisor in the Gram Panchayat Library at Marehalli Gramapanchayat, Malavalli Taluk, Mandya District by Chief Librarian, Grade-II, District Central Library, Mandya on contract basis. Petitioner while working as a Supervisor in the Gram Panchayat Library, she has forged the signature of Panchayat Development Officer. Taking into the serious allegation, the respondents have terminated service of the petitioner from the post of Supervisor of the Gram Panchayat Library, Marehalli who was appointed on contract basis. Even though, the domestic enquiry has not been held to prove that whether the petitioner has forged the signature of Panchayat Development Officer or not, at the same time, the petitioner in her own hand writing admitted in her statement at Annexure-C dated 22.05.2014, relating to alleged allegations.
3. In view of the facts and circumstances, the petitioner has not made out a case so as to interfere with the office order dated 05.08.2014. Accordingly, petition stands dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE HA/-