Karnataka High Court
N Raghumurthy vs State Of Karnataka on 29 February, 2024
Author: K.Somashekar
Bench: K.Somashekar
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:8489-DB
WP No. 24331 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K
WRIT PETITION NO. 24331 OF 2023 (S-KSAT)
BETWEEN:
N.RAGHUMURTHY,
S/O T.NINGAPPA NAYAKA,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
WORKING AS TAHASILDAR,
CHALLAKERE TALUQA,
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577 522.
R/AT NO.264 I MAIN,
VINAYAKA LAYOUT, NAGARBHAVI,
BENGALURU-560 072.
...PETITIONER
Digitally signed by (BY SRI. RAVI B NAIK, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
K S RENUKAMBA SRI. VIJETHA R NAIK, ADVOCATE)
Location: HIGH
COURT OF AND:
KARNATAKA
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
M.S BUILDING,
DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD,
V FLOOR,
BENGALURU-560 001.
2. UNDER SECRETARY STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REVENUE DEPARTMENT(SERVICES-3),
M.S BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR,
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:8489-DB
WP No. 24331 of 2023
BENGALURU-560 001.
3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT,
K.G. ROAD, BENGALURU-560 009.
4. THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
BENGALURU NORTH SUB DIVISION,
KANDAYA BHAVAN, K.G. ROAD,
BENGALURU-560 009.
5. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
BENGALURU NORTH SUB DIVISION,
KANDAYA BHAVAN, K.G. ROAD,
BENGALURU-560 009.
6. THE TAHASILDAR,
DEVANAHALLI TALUQA,
DEVANAHALLI-562 110.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. VIKAS ROJIPURA AGA FOR R1 TO R6)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO a.
ISSUE A WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF
CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE FOR
ENQUIRY DATED 30.12.2021 VIDE No. KA AM EE 358 ASD
2020 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-R AND ALL ACTION PURSUANT
THEREUNTO AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, RAJESH RAI K, J., MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:8489-DB
WP No. 24331 of 2023
ORDER
In this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the legality and correctness of the order passed in A.No.1398/2022 dated 27.05.2023 by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal (for short 'the KSAT') at Bengaluru, wherein the Tribunal dismissed the application filed by the petitioner.
2. The factual matrix which are necessary for disposal of this writ petition are as under:
The petitioner while working as a Tahsildar, Yelahanka Taluk, Bengaluru Urban District reported pertaining to the genuineness of the Revenue Records of the land bearing Sy.No.79 measuring to an extent of 17 acres 35 guntas of Shettigere Village, Jala Hobli, Yelahanka Taluk, Bengaluru District, vide his letter bearing No.LND(Jala)/CR/244/2019-20 dated 22.01.2020, reporting that the land was granted in favour of one Smt. Bhagyamma, Sri. Kenchanna, Sri. Subramani, Smt. Shantamma and Smt. Basamma who are all residing in the above said Shettigere Village during the year 1978-79 in the manual RTC up to the year 1999-2000. Their names were appeared in the RTC and subsequent to -4- NC: 2024:KHC:8489-DB WP No. 24331 of 2023 computerization, their names are not continued in the RTC and when it was challenged before this Court in W.P.Nos.52441, 52340 and 52557/2019, this Court has directed to consider their representation for continuation of their names in the RTC. The Tahsildar, Yelahanka Taluk, Bengaluru Urban District reported that, original Shettigere Village belongs to Devanahalli Taluk, therefore, he has requested the Tahsildar of Devanahalli Taluk to provide register and all grant records and in turn the Tahsildar, Devanahalli Taluk vide communication dated
03.02.2020, reported that Sy.No.79 of Shettigere Village totally measuring 17 acres 35 guntas has been granted in favour of one Smt. Bhagyamma, Sri. Kenchanna, Sri. Subramani, Smt. Shantamma and Smt. Basamma. To that effect, he has placed the Dharakastvahi, issue Register Extract and receipt for payment of Kimath, Saguvali Chit, Revenue Sketch and Manual RTC. The Tahsildar, Yelahanka Taluk, Bengaluru Urban District further reported that upon verification in the record room, it found the documents like Saguvali Chit, orders of the Deputy Commissioner, Assistant Commissioner and Tahsildar of Devanahalli Taluk, survey sketch, receipt for payment, original application and other original grant records which are tallied -5- NC: 2024:KHC:8489-DB WP No. 24331 of 2023 with the records which were sent by the Tahsildar, Devanahalli Taluk.
3. The Special Deputy Commissioner registered in a case No.RRT(2)(NA)/CR/01/2020-21 in respect of the genuineness of the documents of the land in question and during the course of enquiry, a report from the Assistant Commissioner, Bengaluru North Sub Division was sought. After having verified the records pertaining to the land grant in the Office of Tahsildar, Yelahanka Taluk, the Assistant Commissioner has reported that the grant records pertaining to Sy.No.79 of Shettigere Village, Jala Hobli, Yelahanka Taluk are available in the record room of the Taluk Office. However, upon verification, it was revealed that the grant records pertaining to the grant are created one. The Saguvali Chit has been written in ball pen and it also found that, it is of recent handwriting. Other records in the file have been written in an ink pen. The Assistant Commissioner, Bengaluru North Sub Division submitted the survey sketch, Saguvali Chit, Office note, report of the Revenue Inspector, Aahavalu Takthe were written in the same handwriting by the very same person as such he -6- NC: 2024:KHC:8489-DB WP No. 24331 of 2023 expressed the doubt with regard to the genuineness of the grant.
4. Further, it is submitted that the Assistant Commissioner has also reported that in respect of Sy.No.79 of Shettigere Village, the records in LND/SR/1/1112/75-76 and LND(BET)/56/78-79 have been catalogued and indexed, but in between the documents which have been catalogued and indexed, the subject grant records are found. Further, as per the above said cataloguing the indexing total 94 pages are computerized. However, by examining the documents, it is found to have 101 pages in LND/SR/(1)/1112/75-76. Further, in LND(PET)56/78-79, total 64 cataloguing and indexed. The Assistant Commissioner further reported that, in IL and RR, there is no reference for grant of land in question and there are no documents to show that, based on the grant, khata has been transferred. Further, by perusing the Pahani Book, which shows the entry has been made in the last page and the ink used for said entry has been made in the last page and the ink used for said entry is differed from entry in the other pages and even handwriting also differed. Accordingly he has reported -7- NC: 2024:KHC:8489-DB WP No. 24331 of 2023 that the grant records in respect of the land in question are created one.
5. Further, it is submitted that, in RRT(2)NCR1/2020- 21 proceedings, the Special Deputy Commissioner, after having verified all the records pertaining to Sy.No.79 of Shettigere Village, found that they are all concocted and bogus records, passed orders vide order dated 24.09.2020 and requested the Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru District to initiate appropriate enquiry against the Tahsildar, Yelahanka Taluk and other staff who are instrumental in creating and forging the grant documents in order to grab the valuable Government land which runs into hundreds of crore. However, to clear the ambiguity pertaining to the observations made in the Paragraph Nos.11, 12, 13, and 22 of the order dated 24.09.2020, the Special Deputy Commissioner has issued a Corrigendum on 25.09.2020.
6. Further, it is submitted that, as per the recommendation of the Special Deputy Commissioner, respondent No.3 has verified the records and the concerned records prima facie shows that the petitioner being the -8- NC: 2024:KHC:8489-DB WP No. 24331 of 2023 Tahsildar of Yelahanka Taluk has failed to maintain absolute integrity and devotion to the duty and committed an act which is unbecoming of Government servant, which is guilty of misconduct under Rule 39(1), (i), (ii) and (iii) of KCS (Conduct) Rules. Accordingly, he issued the show cause notice dated 30.12.2021.
7. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has challenged the show cause notice before the KSAT in A.No.1398/2023 and the KSAT after hearing the matter and also considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the KSAT dismissed the application filed by the petitioner. The legality of the said order is challenged in this writ petition.
8. We have heard the learned Senior counsel Sri. Ravi B. Naik for Sri. Nijetha R Naij for petitioner so also the learned AGA Sri. Vikas Rojipura for the respondents.
9. The learned Senior counsel would contend that the KSAT has erred while passing the impugned order, since in a Public Interest Litigation numbered as W.P.No.10850/2021 (KLR-RES-PIL), the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has -9- NC: 2024:KHC:8489-DB WP No. 24331 of 2023 declared that the Special Deputy Commissioner (KAS Cadre) could not have conducted proceeding under Section 136(3) of the KLR Act and only an Officer of the IAS cadre could have initiated such an exercise. It is held by the Co-ordinate Bench in the said PIL that, Special Deputy Commissioner Sri. Jagadish in the RRT conducting proceedings against the petitioner is virtually contrary to the earlier orders passed by the very same Division Bench. The learned Senior counsel would contend that the grantees have approached this Court in WP No.11542/2020 (KLR-RES) and the single judge of this Court remitted the matter for fresh adjudication of the RRT proceedings to be adjudicated by the Special Deputy Commissioner (IAS cadre). Further, all the State Authorities are directed to be informed about the said order. Additionally, in the said writ petition, the order of the Special Deputy Commissioner in directing for initiating DE against the petitioner is also quashed. Hence, he submits that the order of Special Deputy Commissioner (IAS cadre) in directing departmental enquiry against the petitioner was without jurisdiction/Authority of law and the same was quashed by the Co-ordinate Bench and confirmed by the learned Single Judge. Hence, the question of initiating any
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC:8489-DB WP No. 24331 of 2023 departmental enquiry on the strength of the order which is without authority of law and without jurisdiction and as such he prays that the departmental enquiry on the strength of quashed petition is unsustainable. Accordingly, he prays to allow the writ petition by setting aside the KSAT order.
10. Per Contra, the learned AGA would contend that, looking into the charges leveled against the petitioner are very serious in nature the Assistant Commissioner Prima facie opined that the grant order of Saguvali Chit, office note and the entries made in the said file, are not granted and they are inserted in the file. When there are claims and counter claims, the truth has to be ascertained in a regular departmental enquiry proceeding after recording the evidence on both the sides. By mere issuance of article of charges will not give any cause of action to the petitioner to file the application before the KSAT. The rights of the petitioner going to be affected only after conclusion of the enquiry proceedings if it is ended in imposing penalty against the petitioner as such, accordingly, he prays to dismiss the writ petition.
- 11 -
NC: 2024:KHC:8489-DB WP No. 24331 of 2023
11. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, so also on perusal of the documents made available before us, as rightly contended by the learned Additional Government Advocate, on perusal of the materials and looking into the impugned show cause notice accompanied of article of charges, the charge against the petitioner appears to be serious in nature. Nevertheless, mere issuance of articles of charge will not give any cause of action to the petitioner to approach the KSAT or this Court as his rights are not going to be affected at this stage. Further, as per the Government Order bearing No.RD/358/ASD/2020 Bengaluru dated 05.05.2022, the respondent has initiated the departmental enquiry against the petitioner. Moreover, the learned Senior counsel would submit that, as per the order passed in WP No.11542/2020 by the learned Single Judge of this Court, presently the Special Deputy Commissioner (IAS cadre) is conducting the Departmental Enquiry against the petitioner. The petitioner is having ample opportunity to put forth his defence/true facts before the Enquiring Authority during the course of the proceedings. In such circumstances, we are of the considered view that the
- 12 -
NC: 2024:KHC:8489-DB WP No. 24331 of 2023 KSAT has rightly held that the application filed before it, is at premature stage.
12. Accordingly, by reserving the liberty to the petitioner to raise all his contentions before the Enquiring Officer in the enquiry proceedings including the subsequent events of filing the writ petition before Division Bench of this Court so also the learned Single Judge of this Court, petition stands disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE Sd/-
JUDGE HKV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29