IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2017 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR.H.G.RAMESH ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.34317/2017 (S-KAT) BETWEEN:
IBRAHIM BHAGHAWAN AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS RESIDING AT PLOT No.320 2ND STAGE, HANUMAN NAGAR BELAGAVI-590 010 ...PETITIONER (BY Dr.AMIT DESHPANDE, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY PWD, PORT AND INLAND WATER DEPARTMENT, VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560 001 2. UNDER SECRETARY PWD, PORT AND INLAND WATER DEPARTMENT, VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560 001 3. ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR OF ENQUIRIES NO.1 KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA M.S.BUILDING AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU-560 001 4. THE UPA LOKAYUKTA REPRESENTED BY REGISTRAR KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA M.S.BUILDING AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU-560 001 …RESPONDENTS (GA-SERVED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 29.05.2017 BY RESPONDENT NO.2 PERTAINING TO THE RECOMMENDATION OF RESPONDENT NO.4 AGAINST THE PETITIONER VIDE ANNEXURE-K BY SETTING ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL IN APPLICATION NO.3264/2017 BY ORDER DATED 05.07.2017 VIDE ANNEXURE-M.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Ag.CJ (Oral):
1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 5th July 2017 passed by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore rejecting the application of the petitioner in application No.3264/2017.
2. We have heard learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and perused the record.
3. In the aforementioned application, the petitioner had challenged the second show cause notice dated 29.05.2017 issued to him. The Tribunal has dismissed the application on the ground that it was open to the petitioner to reply to the show cause notice and that it was not a matter for interference. The reasoning of the Tribunal reads as follows:
“4. What is impugned in this application is the second show cause notice issued to the applicant. It is for the applicant to make his explanation to the 2nd show cause notice. If the applicant has given his explanation to the 2nd show cause notice, it is for the Disciplinary Authority to consider the same and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law. But, even before passing the order, the applicant is before this Tribunal. In my view, there is no good ground to quash the 2nd show cause notice and therefore the application is liable to be rejected.”
4. We find no error in the impugned order warranting interference under the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.
Petition dismissed.
Sd/-
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE Yn.
Sd/- JUDGE