Karnataka High Court
Sri Kumaravelu vs Central Power Research Institute on 21 December, 2023
Author: N S Sanjay Gowda
Bench: N S Sanjay Gowda
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:46853
WP No. 16345 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA
WRIT PETITION NO. 16345 OF 2023 (S-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI KUMARAVELU
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
S/O SRI NARAYANA R.,
NO.24, 1ST CROSS, A MAIN ROAD,
GOVINDARAJANAGAR, VIJAYANAGAR POST,
BANGALORE - 560040
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. ASHWINI O., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. CENTRAL POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE
SIR C.V. RAMAN ROAD,
SADASHIVANAGAR SPO,
BANGALORE - 560080.
REP. BY DIRECTOR GENERAL
Digitally
AND DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY.
signed by
KIRAN
...RESPONDENT
KUMAR R (BY SMT. SUNITA SRINIVAS., ADVOCATE)
Location:
HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH
THE IMPUGNED ORDER NO.CPRI/ADM II/21/02/98 DATED
31.03.2011 ANNEXURE-N, PURSUANT TO WHICH HE WAS
IMPROPERLY, ARBITRARILY AND ILLEGALLY DISMISSED FROM
EMPLOYMENT IN THE RESPONDENT INSTITUTE, MERELY
OWING TO THE REASON OF HIS ABSENCE DUE TO GENUINE
HEALTH REASONS, ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:46853
WP No. 16345 of 2023
ORDER
1. The order dated 31.03.2011, by which a penalty of dismissal from service was passed against the petitioner, is challenged in this writ petition. The reasons for dismissal of the petitioner from service was that he was unauthorisedly absent for duty.
2. It is the case of the respondent that every effort made to serve the petitioner with the proposed enquiry notice was unsuccessful and ultimately, left with no other alternative, the enquiry was conducted in his absence and the impugned order was passed.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner while working in the Central power Research Institute (CPRI) was diagnosed with a severe mental illness viz., Paranoid Schizophrenia and he was, therefore, unable to put forth his case before the respondent during the course of enquiry. She made a fervent plea that the case of the petitioner be considered sympathetically, since -3- NC: 2023:KHC:46853 WP No. 16345 of 2023 the petitioner was in a comatose state and he was sleeping for more than 18 hours a day.
4. In the light of the arguments advanced, it was deemed fit to subject the petitioner to a medical examination at the National Institute of Mental health and Neuro Sciences ('the NIMHANS', for short) to ascertain the truth of the matter.
5. The Doctors of NIMHANS have examined the petitioner and submitted two Medical Reports dated 02.11.2023 and the other dated 10.11.2023.
6. In both these Reports, it is stated that the petitioner was admitted to NIMHANS from 27.06.2008 to 30.06.2008 for a period of three days and was diagnosed with Paranoid Schizophrenia. It has been stated that the petitioner was not in coma and he was conscious and oriented to time, place and person. It is also stated that he, thereafter, absconded from the hospital and did not come for follow-up visits. However, on 25.08.2003 and -4- NC: 2023:KHC:46853 WP No. 16345 of 2023 31.08.2023, he came for follow-up visits at NIMHANS with the request for a Medical Report. Lastly, it is stated that during the assessment his symptoms were noted to be in remission.
7. The Medical Report furnished by the NIMHANS thus indicates that the petitioner was in NIMHANS only for a period of three days and he was not in Coma.
8. The order of dismissal was passed against the petitioner on 31.03.2011 and this writ petition has been filed on 24.07.2023 i.e., 12 years after the order of dismissal was made.
9. Having regard to the fact that there is nothing on record to indicate that the petitioner was in Coma and that he was mentally unfit from 2008 till 2023, in my view, there are no justifiable grounds to entertain the writ petition against the order of dismissal passed on 31.03.2011. The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed. -5-
NC: 2023:KHC:46853 WP No. 16345 of 2023
10. However, since the petitioner contends that he had suffered from Paranoid Schizophrenia, as a result of which, he had been rendered unfit and is now in a very bad state financially, the petitioner is permitted to make a representation to the respondent-CPRI requesting them for reinstatement or for providing him with some relief.
11. If such a representation is made, it would be open for the respondent to consider the same sympathetically having regard to the medical condition and the ailment suffered by the petitioner and the length of service rendered by him to the organisation.
12. On such a representation being made, it is hereby hoped and expected that the respondent would consider the same and pass orders within a period of two months from the date of receipt of such a representation.
Sd/-
JUDGE RK Ct: SN/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 59