IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU ON THE 15TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. G. PANDIT WRIT APPEAL NO.1743 OF 2017 (S-DE) BETWEEN:
SRI B.K. MOHANTY SON OF LATE R.K. MOHANTY, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, WORKING AS OFFICER ON SPECIAL DUTY (TECHNICAL), BENGALURU COMPLEX, HINDUSTAN AERONAUTICS LIMITED, VIMANPURA, BENGALURU-560 017.
... APPELLANT (BY SRI PUTTIGE R. RAMESH, ADVOCATE FOR SMT. SANDHYA JAMADAGNI, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. HINDUSTAN AERONAUTICS LIMITED REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, T. SUVARNA RAJU, NO.15/1, CUBBON ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001.
2. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER HINDUSTAN AERONAUTICS LIMITED, BENGALURU COMPLEX, COMPETANT AUTHORITY, VIMANAPURA POST, BENGALURU-560 017, REPRESENTED BY SRI KAVERI RANGANATHAN.
3. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR HUMAN RESOURCES, HINDUSTAN AERONAUTICS LIMITED, NO.15/1, CUBBON ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001, REPRESENTED BY SRI A.K. TYAGI.
4. DIRECTOR (H.R.) CORPORATE OFFICE, HINDUSTAN AERONAUTICS LIMITED, NO.15/1, CUBBON ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001, REPRESENTED BY SRI V.M. CHAMOLA.
5. INTERNAL COMPLAINT COMMITTEE REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, SMT. T. ARUNA RAO, DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER H.R., OVERHAUL DIVISION, HINDUSTAN AERONAUTICS LIMITED, VIMANAPURA POST, BENGALURU-560 017.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI PRATIK PANY, ADVOCATE FOR M/S. SUNDARASWAMY AND RAMADAS, FOR R-1 TO R-4) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1964 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED IN THE WRIT PETITION NO.59536 OF 2016 DATED 30/01/2017.
***** THIS WRIT APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, RAVI MALIMATH J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT Aggrieved by the order dated 30.01.2017, passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.59536 of 2016, in dismissing the petition with observations, the writ petitioner has filed this appeal.
2. Both learned counsels submit that subsequent to the order passed by the learned Single Judge, the enquiry has been concluded and that the punishment has also been imposed. The same is challenged by the very same appellant in W.P.No.22945 of 2017.
3. Under these circumstances, we are of the view that nothing further survives for consideration in this appeal. Consequently, writ appeal is dismissed as being infructuous, keeping open all contentions to be urged in Writ Petition No.22945 of 2017.
Sd/- Sd/-
JUDGE JUDGE JJ/-