IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.N.SATYANARAYANA AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NOs.27882-27886/2016 [S-KAT] BETWEEN:
SRI. H.R. NARASIMHAIAH S/O. RANGAPPA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS AGRICULTURAL ASSISTANT [TECHNICAL] [COMPULSORY RETIRED] LAST EMPLOYED IN OFFICE OF A.D.A. SIRA, RESIDENT OF HALENAHALLY, SIRA TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT – 572 125 DEAD BY LRs:
1 SMT. VIJAYALAKSHMI W/O. LATE SRI. NARASIMHAIAH AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS 2 MISS. NAIDILE H.N.
D/O. LATE SRI. NARASIMHAIAH AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS 3 MISS. CHAITRA KUSUMA H.N., D/O. LATE SRI. NARASIMHAIAH AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS 4 MISS. PAYASHWINI D/O. LATE SRI. NARASIMHAIAH AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS 5 SRI. NRUPALSIMHA S/O. LATE SRI. NARASIMHAIAH AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS ALL ARE RESIDING AT C/O. HANUMANTHARAJU KALLAMBALLI HOBLI, HALENAHALLI TALUK, SIRA, TUMKUR DISTRICT – 572 125 …PETITIONERS [BY SRI. ANJANEYA, ADVOCATE] AND:
1 THE STATE OF KARNATAKA CHIEF SECRETARY VIDHANA SOUDHA BANGALORE – 560 001 2 THE SECRETARY TO THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE & HORTICULTURE M.S. BUILDING BENGALURU – 560 001 3 THE DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE SHESHADRI ROAD BENGALURU – 560 001 4 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURAL OFFICE TUMKUR DISTRICT TUMKUR – 572 102 …RESPONDENTS [BY SMT. SHILPA S. GOGI, HCGP] THESE PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND R-3 DT. 5.2.1999 [ANNX-J] OFFICE ORDER NO.SIBBANDHI-1:I.N.Q.5:51:96- 97 AND ETC.,.
THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, SATYANARAYANA J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The legal heirs of deceased applicant in Application No.1765/2002 on the file of the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal [‘Tribunal’, for short], has come up with these writ petitions, impugning the order dated 29.01.2016 as well as earlier order dated 5.2.1999 of Respondent No.3 which is in imposing the order of compulsory retirement to deceased applicant vide Annexure-A1 which was subsequently confirmed by the Respondent No.1 by order dated 15.09.2001. The said orders were subject matter of challenge before the Tribunal in Application No.1765/2002.
2. Besides this, the petitioners herein are also seeking several directions, to sanction three years of salary with increment and other reliefs for the period from 1.1.1994 to 26.02.1997 and also for initiating disciplinary proceedings against three officers who according to petitioners were responsible for delay in conducting disciplinary proceedings initiated against deceased applicant before the Tribunal and for various other directions.
3. The brief facts leading to these writ petitions are as under:
The applicant before the Tribunal while working as ‘Agricultural Assistant’ remained unauthorizedly absent for a period of nearly three years, hence enquiry was initiated against him where he was found to be guilty of offence that was charged against him. Hence, the order of compulsory retirement was passed against the said person by Respondent No.3 on 5.2.1999 which was confirmed by Respondent No.1 by order dated 15.09.2001. The same were subject matter of challenge before the Tribunal in Application No.1765/2002. Besides seeking to set aside these orders, several other prayers were sought in initiating the proceedings against the Officers who were involved in conducting enquiry against delinquent employee and for other reliefs. It is seen that, immediately after application was filed by H.R. Narasimhaiah, he died and his death was also brought to the notice of the Tribunal and thereafter the legal representatives came on record and matter was heard and disposed of by the Tribunal by order dated 29.01.2016.
4. When the order impugned are looked into, it is clearly seen that the order of Disciplinary Authority- Respondent No.3 which is confirmed by the Appellate Authority, appears to be just and proper which is rightly confirmed by the Tribunal by its order dated 29.01.2016. Accordingly, no grounds are made out to entertain these writ petitions so far as order of confirmation of his compulsory retirement is concerned. With reference to non-consideration of his prayer for other directions which he had sought, appears to be just and proper in the facts and circumstances. Hence, this Court is of the considered opinion that, the present petition does not merit consideration.
Accordingly, the writ petitions are dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE AN/-