IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019 BEFORE BETWEEN:
THE HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE B. VEERAPPA WRIT PETITION No.49556/2013(GM-RES) VASANTH RAO, S/O LATE U. L. ANANDA RAO, AGE 59 YEARS, PIO & GENERAL MANAGER (FINANCE), BANGALORE METRO RAIL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED, BMTC COMPLEX, SHANTHI NAGAR, BANGALORE-560027.
(BY SMT. SUMANA BALIGA, ADVOCATE) AND:
1 . KARNATAKA INFORMATION COMMISSION 2ND FLOOR, M.S.BUILDING, BANGALORE-560 001 ALSO HAVIANG ITS 2ND UNIT AT MYTHIC SOCIETY, OPPOSITE YAVANIKA, NRIPATUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE-560001. REP. BY ITS SECRETARY.
2 . T. NARASIMHA MURTHY, No.18, E 4TH STREET, OM ROAD, ULSOOR, BANGALORE-560008.
...PETITIONER …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI G. B. SHARATH GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R1; R2 IS SERVED BUT UNREPRESENTED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE/ORDER DATED 7.01.2013, PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT-1, VIDE ANNEXURE-D AND ETC., THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER In the above writ petition, the petitioner has sought for the following reliefs:
a) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other similar writ or order or direction to quash the show cause notice/order dated 7.1.2013 by the 1st respondent in KIC/8091/PTN/2012 vide Annexure-D;
b) Issue a writ of Certiorari or any other similar writ or order or direction to quash the show cause notice/order dated 6.3.2013 by the 1st respondent in KIC/8091/PTN/2012 vide Annexure-E;
c) Issue a writ of Certiorari or any other similar writ or order or direction to quash the order dated 8.5.2013 by the respondent KIC/8091/PTN/2012 vide Annexure-G;
d) Issue a writ of Certiorari or any other similar writ or order or direction to quash the order dated 23.9.2013 by the 1st respondent in KIC/8091/PTN/2012 vide Annexure-H.
2. The main grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition is that the impugned orders passed by the 1st respondent are in utter violation of principles of natural justice, since he was not given an opportunity of being heard before imposing penalty and therefore, the impugned orders cannot be sustained. The same is not disputed by the learned Counsel for the respondents.
3. Both the learned Counsel fairly submit that in identical circumstances, this Court in the case of Vasanth Rao –vs- Karnataka Information Commission and Another in W.P.Nos.32842/2012 and 32840 & 32841/2012 by the order dated 6th August, 2019 has quashed the similar orders passed therein and remanded the matter to the 1st respondent for reconsideration afresh after giving liberty to both the parties.
4. In view of the above, without adverting to the merits and demerits of the case, this writ petition is disposed off on the ground that the petitioner was not heard before passing the impugned order. The matter is remanded to the 1st respondent for reconsideration afresh after giving liberty to both the petitioner as well as the 2nd respondent to file response, if any and the 1st respondent shall consider and pass appropriate orders strictly in accordance with law.
5. However, the parties are directed to appear before the 1st respondent on 10.1.2020.
Ordered accordingly.
Sd/- Judge Nsu/-