IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE R. DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO.27123 OF 2014 (S-DIS) BETWEEN:
S.V.Narayanappa S/o Venkateshappa, Aged about 53 years, Bill Collector, Thotli Grama Panchayat, Sugatur Hobli, Kolar Taluk & District-563101 ... Petitioner (By Sri. Reuben Jacob, Advocate) AND:
1. State of Karnataka, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department M.S.Building, Bangalore-560001. Represented by Principal Secretary 2. Director Panchayat Raj and Designated Joint Secretary, Department of Rural Development And Panchayat Raj, M.S.Building, Bangalore-560001.
3. Kolar Zilla Panchayat Kolar-563101 Represented by Chief Executive Officer 4. Thotli Grama Panchayat Thotli Village, Kolar Taluk and District-563101 Represented by Panchayat Development Officer ... Respondents (By Sri. Sridhar N.Hegde, HCGP for R1 and R2, Sri. M.Narayana Reddy, Advocate for R3 and R4) This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the communications dated 20.1.2014 and dated 31.1.2014 both issued by the R-2 and memorandum dated 1.4.2014 issued by the R-3 vide Annexure-G, H and J and etc.
This writ petition coming on for Hearing on I.A. this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER The petitioner is a Bill Collector employed with respondent No.4-Grama Panchayath. The petitioner was appointed as Bill Collector in the year 1989 vide appointment order dated 25.06.1989. It is submitted by the petitioner that in the year of 2008, on a false complaint made by one Narayan Swamy, a Lokayuktha case was registered against the petitioner by the Lokayuktha Police, Kolar in Crime No.4/2008. On initiation of the said criminal proceedings, the petitioner was placed under suspension for a certain period of time. Thereafter, the suspension was revoked on 17.06.2008. On 10.02.2011, the petitioner was acquitted in the said Lokayuktha case, by the order passed by the Principal Sessions Judge, Kolar. The petitioner is continued in services in respondent No.4- Grama Panchayath.
2. When the matter stood thus, the Director of the Department of Panchayaraj and Rural Development, issued two communications dated 20.01.2014 and 31.01.2014 to respondent No.3-Zilla Panchayath, directing the CEO to initiate departmental enquiry against the petitioner. Pursuant to the said direction, the CEO of respondent No.3-Zilla Panchayath, in turn communicated the direction issued by the Director to respondent No.4 – Grama Panchayath. Following the said direction a departmental enquiry were initiated against the petitioner. Being aggrieved, the petitioner is before this Court.
3. From the records it could be seen that an interim order was granted on 17.06.2014, staying all further proceedings pursuant to the impugned communications. However, the departmental enquiry was proceeded with and on 28.06.2018, an enquiry report was submitted holding that the charges against the petitioner were not proved. The report has been accepted by respondent No.4 –Grama Panchayath in its meeting dated 07.07.2018. Having accepting the report of the enquiry officer, the Disciplinary Authority viz. Grama Panchayath has communicated the same to the CEO of the Zilla Panchayath. The Zilla Panchayath has in turn communicated to respondent No.1-Government by a letter dated 03.11.2018, that the departmental enquiry has concluded and the charges leveled against the petitioner remain unproved. In that view of the matter, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that nothing survives for consideration in this writ petition and the same may be disposed of in view of the subsequent development.
4. Accepting the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petition is disposed of as nothing further survives for consideration in this writ petition.
Accordingly, I.A.No.1/2019 is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE KTY.