IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.9259 OF 2016 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
MR. P.C. ZACHARIAH AGED ABOUT 87 YEARS S/O P.E. CHERIAN WITH ADDRESS AT NO.359 11TH CROSS ROAD 2ND BLOCK, R.T.NAGAR BENGALURU-560 032 AND PRESENTLY RESIDING AT ST. AUGUSTINE SENIOR CITIZEN HOME 4TH CROSS, CAUVERY LAYOUT THAVEREKERE MAIN ROAD BENGALURU-560 095.
(By Mr. MOHAMMED SHAMEER, ADV., FOR Mr. GEORGE JOSEPH, ADV.,) AND:
THE TRUSTEE COMMITEE A STATUTORY BODY CONSTITUTED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA ADVOCATES WELFARE FUND ACT, 1983 KARNATAKA STATE BAR COUNCIL OLD K.G.I.D. BUILDING DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU-560 001 REP. BY ITS SECRETARY.
(By Mr. G. NATARAJ, ADV.) … PETITIONER … RESPONDENT - - -
This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to direct the respondent to consider the application for payment from the fund in case of retirement claim (vide Annexure-B) filed by the petitioner with the respondent on 3.6.2015 within a period of one week from the date of disposal of the instant writ petition and etc.
This Writ Petition coming on for preliminary hearing in ‘B’ group this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER Sri.Mohammed Shameer, learned counsel for Sri.George Joseph, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Sri.G.Nataraj, learned counsel for the respondent.
2. The petition is admitted for hearing. With consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the same is heard finally.
3. In this petition, the petitioner inter alia has prayed the following reliefs:
i. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ / direction of the like nature, directing the respondent to consider the application for payment from the fund in case of retirement claim (vide Annexure-B) filed by the petitioner with the respondent on 03.06.2015 within a period of one week from the date of disposal of the instant writ petition;
i(a) issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ / direction of the like nature, directing the respondent to pay the balance sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only) along with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. on the entire amount of Rs.4,00,000/- (Rupees Four Lakhs only) from 03.06.2015 till date of payment.
ii. Award costs of the instant writ petition;
iii. Pass any other appropriate order which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the circumstances of the case;
in the interest of justice and equity.
4. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioner, while inviting the attention to the letter dated 05.07.2016 sent by the Karnataka State Bar Council, submitted that by the aforesaid communication, the petitioner has been informed that a sum of `3,70,000/- has been paid to him on account of full and final settlement. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent has supported the order passed by the Karnataka State Bar Council.
6. I have considered the submissions made on both sides. It is well settled in law that a quasi judicial authority is required to assign reasons for its conclusion in view of the decision laid down by the Supreme Court in ‘VICTORIA MEMORIAL HALL vs. HOWRAH GANATANTRIK NAGRIK’, 2010 (3) SCC 732.
7. In view of the aforesaid well settled legal position, it is trite law that even a quasi judicial authority, if it passes an order, has to do so by assigning reasons. In the instant case, there is no adjudication of the claim of the petitioner and the petitioner has only been informed that a sum of `3,70,000/- has been paid to him on account of full and final settlement. The petitioner, therefore, has been deprived even of a right to file an appeal before the competent authority of the Bar Council. The impugned order is therefore cryptic and arbitrary and suffers from the vice of non-application of mind. Accordingly, it is quashed and set aside. The aforesaid competent authority is directed to afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass an order afresh in accordance with law after assigning the reasons. Let the aforesaid exercise be carried out within one month from the date of furnishing of certified copy of the order.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE RV