IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE Mr. JUSTICE S.N.SATYANARAYANA WRIT PETITION NO.17485/2018 (S-RES) BETWEEN:
M.NAGARAJU, S/O LATE GANGADARAIAH, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, NO.1069, 4TH MAIN, 1ST STAGE, VIJAYANAGAR, MYSORE – 17.
…PETITIONER (BY SRI. D.R.RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY, REGIONAL OFFICE, UNITY BUILDING, ANNEXE.P.KALINGA RAO ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 027.
BY ITS MANAGER.
2. G.M.KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, SON OF MUNIYAPPA, R/O GADDEHALLI MAVINAHALLI POST, C.S.PURA HOBLI, GUBBI TALUK, TUMKUR – 572 101.
3. SMT. SIDDAGANGAMMA, AGED MAJOR, W/O HUCHHEGOWD,A R/O ROJIPURA DODDABALLAPURA, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT – 561 203.
…RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDERS DATED 16.03.2018 IN MFA NO.2451/2009 (ANNEXURE – E) AND ETC., THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER The petitioner herein is a retired Labour Officer. It is stated that he was working as Workmen’s Compensation Commissioner, Bengaluru City, Division-III, Bannergatta Road, for the period from 12.11.2001 to 31.10.2009. During which period he has decided the claim petition in proceedings bearing No.CWC-3/NFC/CR.5/2006 and has passed an award in said proceedings on 20.8.2008, wherein he had awarded compensation to the claimant in a sum of Rs.4,54,251/- payable with interest at 12% by the 1st respondent – insurance company.
2. When the award passed in the aforesaid claim proceedings was subjected to challenge before this Court in MFA.No.2451/2009 by 1st respondent – insurance company, the same was heard and decided by judgment dated 9.3.2011, wherein this Court observed that serious error is committed by the Workmen’s Compensation Commissioner i.e., petitioner herein in considering the prayer of the claimant in claim proceedings and this Court also felt that there is large scale manipulation in conducting the said proceedings. Accordingly, while disposing of the said appeal, sent the matter to Home Secretary to entrust the same to an Honest Officer to conduct enquiry against three persons, who according to this Court had a role in manipulating the records resulting in passing of the award by the petitioner herein.
3. Thereafter, an enquiry was conducted by one Sri.B.Dayanand, I G of Police and Additional I G (Traffic), Bengaluru City and the report submitted by him in proceedings bearing No.57/Offence/EOD/CID/2013, dated 15.12.2014 was placed before this Court which was not accepted by this Court. In fact, the said enquiry having found to be lopsided, this Court passed the order dated 16.3.2018 in directing the jurisdictional Magistrate to look into the records and thereafter to take cognizance of the offence and to frame appropriate charges against all those who are concerned in said proceedings.
4. The said order which was passed on 16.3.2018 is subject matter of challenge in this proceedings on the ground that the petitioner herein is an honest officer, he is not involved in any fraud, though he is now retired his terminal benefits are withheld because of the proceedings initiated by this Court and that he is singled out in this proceedings to receive such kind of treatment when another officer similarly placed who is retired earlier has secured retirement benefits. Therefore, the same benefit should be extended to him in accepting the report of the I G of Police and recall the order dated 16.3.2018.
5. In this petition and the representations appended thereto several serious allegations which are totally unnecessary are also made, wherein it is stated that petitioner herein belongs to oppressed class, hence he is singled out to face the consequences. However, when the entire petition averments are seen, it is nothing but an attempt to emotionally blackmail this Court. As stated supra, this Court while going through the award passed by the petitioner herein in aforesaid claim proceedings has seen that serious lapses are committed by the Investigating Officer in verifying the documents concocted by the Investigating Officer, Doctor and the Claimant in the claim proceedings. Though said lapses are openly seen, the petitioner herein having turned a blind eye, appears to have joined hands with them in passing an award in favour of the claimant in the claim proceedings, to which this Court is of the considered opinion that the Claimant was not entitled to. It is in this background that the enquiry was ordered to be conducted. In fact, it is the considered opinion of this Court that in the enquiry held, the enquiry officer has deliberately ignored the material available on record. Therefore, this Court has rightly passed the order dated 16.3.2018 in directing the entire matter to the jurisdictional Magistrate for taking cognizance and thereafter to hear the same as regular offence.
6. In that view of the matter, when serious allegations are noticed by this Court while disposing of MFA.No.2451/2009, the averments made by the petitioner that he belongs to oppressed class and that he is deliberately haunted, are without any basis. Further, the assertion of the petitioner that one another Officer involved in the matter has already received terminal benefits is neither within the knowledge of this Court nor this Court has authorized the same. Therefore, the petitioner cannot seek parallel to said benefit comparing to the other person, who is also said to be involved in the fraud noticed by this Court in aforesaid MFA.
7. In the fact situation, this Court find that no justifiable grounds are made out to entertain this writ petition. Accordingly, the same is dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE VMB/nd