IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF MAY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE P.B.BAJANTHRI WRIT PETITION No.7941/2014 (S-DIS) BETWEEN:
LAKSHMINARASIMHAIAH S/O. LATE CHINNASWAAIAH AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/AT: 80/2, NARASIMHYA PALYA, OPP: TO BENGGARS COLONY, MAGADI MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 091 ... PETITIONER (BY SRI.R.PADMANABHA, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE SOCIAL WELFARE DEPT. VIKASA SOUDHA, VIDHANAVEEDHI, BANGALORE.
2. THE SECRETARY, CENTRAL RELIEF COMMITTEE MAGADI MAIN ROAD, BEGGARS COLONY, BANGALORE – 560 001 ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.SRIDHAR N. HEGDE, HCGP FOR R-1; NOTICE TO R-2 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 8.1.2014 PASSED BY THE R-2 VIDE ANN-E.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R In the instant petition petitioner has assailed the penalty order dated 24.06.2016 by which the second respondent imposed the penalty under sub-rule (iii) of Rule 8 of the Karnataka Civil Service (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957 (for short ‘CCA Rules’) while withholding two (2) increments with cumulative effect, which is a major penalty.
2. Matter is pending consideration since 2014.
None appears for the second respondent. Perusal of Annexure-F it is evident that before invoking sub-rule (iii) of Rule 8 of CCA Rules second respondent has not initiated enquiry under Rule 11 or 12 of the CCA Rules. On this score itself impugned penalty order dated 24.06.2016 is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, it is set aside. Writ petition is allowed reserving liberty to the petitioner to proceed in accordance with law.
Sd/- JUDGE DR