Karnataka High Court
Smt. Gayathri. D. V. vs The Kuvempu University on 8 October, 2020
Author: R Devdas
Bench: R Devdas
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 08TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2020
BEFORE
THE HON' BLE MR.JUSTICE R DEVDAS
WRIT PETITION NO.9297 OF 2020 (S-R)
BETWEEN
SMT. GAYATHRI.D.V,
W/O L.P. RANGANATHA
AGED 60 YEARS,
R/AT SRIRANGA, 3RD CROSS,
GANAPATHI LAYOUT, VIDYANAGAR,
SHIVAMOGGA - 577 203. ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SADASHIVAIAH K.G., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE KUVEMPU UNIVERSITY,
REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR,
JNANASAHYADRI,
SHANKARAGHATTA,
SHIVAMOGGA - 577 451.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT,
SHIVAMOGGA - 577 201. ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. S. V. PRAKASH, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
BY SRI. SREEDHAR N. HEGDE, HCGP FOR R2)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE R-1 IN ORDER DATED
29.06.2020 AS PER ANNEXURE -A TO THE WRIT PETITION.(II)
DIRECT THE R-1 TO SETTLE THE RETIREMENT BENEFITS
OF THE PETITIONER AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING IN 'B' GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
-2-
ORDER
R. DEVDAS J., (ORAL):
This writ petition seeks to quash the order dated 29.06.2020 at Annexure-A, passed by the Registrar of the 1st respondent-Kuvempu University placing the petitioner under suspension w.e.f. 29.06.2020.
2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed as First Division Clerk in the 1st respondent-university in the year 1989, by virtue of an appointment order dated 26.10.1989. Since, there was some complaints against the petitioner that she had obtained employment on the basis of a false Caste Certificate, at the instance of the university the Additional Director General of Police, Civil Rights Enforcement Cell, Bengaluru (hereinafter referred to as 'the ADGP, CRE Cell') conducted an enquiry. The ADGP, CRE Cell made a communication dated 20.10.1995 to the Registrar of the 1st respondent-university that after holding a detailed enquiry it was found that the petitioner belongs to "Marati Community", that the school records of the siblings of the petitioner would also show that they belong to Marati community. It was ascertained from the locals and -3- neighbors that the petitioner and her family members belong to Marati community. It was concluded that as per the Presidential Notification, persons who belong to Marati community and hailing from South Canara District were listed as Scheduled Tribes and therefore, the petitioner belongs to Scheduled Tribe category. Subsequently, the Registrar of the respondent-university seems to have once again forwarded complaints against the petitioner reiterating that she has obtained Caste Certificate based on false information. The Inspector of Police, CRE Cell, once again communicated to the respondent-university on 09.03.2009, stating that a detailed enquiry has already been conducted in this regard and therefore, there cannot be any doubt that the petitioner belongs to Marati community, which is a Scheduled Tribe community. At Annexure-F, a communication dated 23.03.2009 is furnished to show that the Tahsildar of the Theerthahalli Taluk has made a communication to one Sri.Krishnamurhty M.A., who is said to be the President of SC/ST Non-Teaching Employees Association, Kuvempu University giving details of the enquiry held and it was once again reiterated that -4- the petitioner and her siblings were all from Jaddagadde village and they belong to a Scheduled Tribe category.
3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner further draws the attention of this Court to an order dated 15.07.2017 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Shivamogga District after conducting an enquiry at the instance of the said G.S.Krishnamurthy and others, arraying the ADGP, CRE Cell, as petitioner No.3 and the petitioner herein as the respondent. It is pointed out from the said order that a detailed enquiry has been conducted on the basis of the complaint made by the said Sri.G.S.Krishnamurthy, which would reveal that basically the petitioner's father and grand parents were from Hebri village, Karkala Taluk, Dakshina Kannada District and they belong to Marati community. It was found that the entire family resettled from Karkala, as per the information given by the Tahsildar on 13.07.1995. It was found that forefathers of the petitioner and their blood relatives were from Daskhina Kannada District and oral evidence has been furnished by the neighbors which would evidence the fact that the petitioner's family and her forefathers belong to Marati community and hailed from Dakshina Kannada -5- District. Consequently, after the full fledged enquiry the Deputy Commissioner held that the petitioner belongs to Marati community, which is listed as a Scheduled Tribe under the Presidential Notification.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the said G.S.Krishnamurthy, not being satisfied with the orders passed by the competent authorities, filed a private complaint under Section 200 of Cr.P.C., seeking cognizance for offences punishable under Sections 175, 176, 177, 198, 199, 415, 465, 468, 471 and 474 r/w Section 34 of I.P.C., against the petitioner and her brothers and sisters. The private complaint was filed during the year 2013. It is submitted that when the matter stood thus, the impugned order has been issued placing the petitioner under suspension a day prior to her retirement.
5. Learned Counsel Sri. S.V.Prakash appearing for the 1st respondent-university submits that the order of suspension has been passed invoking the provisions of Clause 7(1) (a) of the Mysore University Employees (Classification, Control and Appeal) Statute, 1983 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Statute'). It is submitted -6- that the university is under obligation to place an employee under suspension if a case is registered in respect of any criminal offence against any of the employee of the university. The learned Counsel would also submit that subsequently it has been found by the Assistant Commissioner that the Migration Certificate, which was furnished by the petitioner during the enquiry was a forged document.
6. Heard the learned Counsels for the petitioner, the respondent-university & learned HCGP for the 2nd respondent-Deputy Commissioner and perused the petition papers.
7. As submitted by the learned Counsel for the respondent-university, it seems that the impugned order of suspension has been issued invoking the provisions of the Statute as referred to above. But, what is glaring is that when it was incumbent upon the university to get the Caste Certificate verified immediately after the order of appointment, the university did not do so. On the basis of complaints, which is obviously given by the said G.S.Krishnamurthy, the competent authority i.e., the ADGP, CRE Cell has caused an enquiry. The required -7- information was collected through the concerned Tahsildar. After holding a detailed enquiry the competent authority came to conclusion that the petitioner and her family belong to Marati community and since they hailed from Dakshina Kannada District, as per the Presidential Notification, the petitioner and her family members belong to a Scheduled Tribe community. This communication was made way back in the year 1995 to the respondent- university. The university has accepted the enquiry report and the petitioner has continued to serve the university. What is astonishing is that the Registrar of the university deemed it fit to invoking the provisions of Clause 7(1) (a) of the Statute, a day before the retirement of the petitioner. As seen from the impugned order, the basis for issuance of the suspension order is a criminal case in PCR No.26/2014 said to have been filed by the very same person, who has been making allegations and complaints and at whose instance the enquiry was conducted by the competent authority. The fact that the private complaint was registered during the month of November, 2013 also cannot be lost sight of. What prompted the respondent- university to keep quite all the while from 2013-14 and -8- thereafter pass the order of suspension just a day prior to the retirement of the petitioner, i.e., 29.06.2020, is unfathomable.
8. Clause Nos.7(1) and 7(2) read as follows:
7(1) The appointing authority or any authority to which it is subordinate may place an employee under suspension;
(a) where the disciplinary proceedings against him as contemplated or is pending;
(b) where a case against him in respect
of any criminal offence is under
investigation or trial;
7(2) The Registrar (Evaluation) the
Finance Officer, Principals of University colleges and the Chairman's of the Department of Board of studies may place under suspension any employee belonging to Group-B or Group-C working under him;
(a) where a criminal proceedings against the employee as contemplated or is pending;
(b) provided that in any such case the authority suspending such an employee shall forthwith report to the appointing authority the circumstances under which the order was made.-9-
9. Admittedly, there is no disciplinary proceedings initiated or pending against the petitioner while the order of suspension was issued. The university has admittedly caused an enquiry on the allegations made against the petitioner regarding furnishing a false Caste Certificate, the competent authority has gone into the complaint, conducted a detailed enquiry and submitted a report that there is no truth in the allegations made against the petitioner. The university admittedly, did not question the report submitted by the competent authority. Therefore, the issue regarding the genuinity of the Caste Certificate claimed by the petitioner has reached finality.
10. As could be seen from the records, the said G.S.Krishnamurthy has been initiating proceedings after proceedings against the petitioner. The Deputy Commissioner has also passed an order in a proceedings, where the ADGP, CRE Cell was also a party. The order was passed by the Deputy Commissioner on 15.07.2017. It is important to notice that the private complaint was registered at the instance of G.S.Krishnamurthy in the month of November, 2013. Obviously, the allegations made in the private complaint would have been reiterated -10- before the Deputy Commissioner in the presence of the competent authority i.e., the ADGP, CRE Cell, who had conducted the earlier enquiry. Such being the case, after the Deputy Commissioner has once again gone into the details of the enquiry that was conducted earlier and having been satisfied that the report submitted by the ADGP, CRE Cell could not be found fault with, the genuinity or otherwise of the cast certificate issued in favour of the petitioner was once again held to be in accordance with law and stood concluded. Under these facts and circumstances, the Registrar of the 1st respondent-university could not have passed the order of suspension only on the premise that a criminal case is under investigation against the petitioner.
11. In the considered opinion of this Court, the invoking of Clause 7(1) and 7(2) of the Statute by the Registrar of the 1st respondent-university cannot be sustained since, it seems to be tainted with malafides. Nevertheless, if the private complaint initiated by the said G.S.Krishnamurthy reaches its logical conclusion, and if it is found that the petitioner had submitted fraudulent document on the basis of which the Caste Certificate was -11- issued in favour of the petitioner, then the petitioner may have to face the consequences. This Court has not dealt with the question of maintainability of the private complaint or the merits of the Criminal Petition No.3923/2020.
12. For the present, on the merits of this writ petition, this Court is of the considered opinion that the impugned order of suspension dated 29.06.2020 is tainted with malafides and therefore the same is liable to be quashed and set aside.
13. Consequently, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 29.06.2020 at Annexure-A issued by the Registrar of the 1st respondent-university is hereby quashed and set aside. The 1st respondent-university is hereby directed to settle the retirement benefits of the petitioner.
It is made clear that if the private complaint which was initiated by Sri.G.S.Krishnamurthy, reaches the logical conclusion that the petitioner had furnished forged documents to secure the Caste Certificate, then the 1st respondent-university is at liberty to proceed against the -12- petitioner and recover the retirement benefits if the law so provides for.
The retirement benefits of the petitioner shall be settled as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
It is ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE DL