Karnataka High Court
Sri M.S.Biradar S/O Sri.Sangonda ... vs The Head Master And Ors on 28 February, 2017
Author: Aravind Kumar
Bench: Aravind Kumar
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.A. PATIL
WP No.202963/2014(S-KAT)
BETWEEN:
Sri. M.S. Biradar,
S/o Sri. Sangonda Biradar,
Aged: about : 60 years,
Occ: Rtd. Teacher No.777,
KK Nagar Basvana Bagewadi Road,
Bijapur-586 109.
... Petitioner
(By Sri. Santosh H. Patil for
Sri. G.G. Chagshetti, Advocate)
AND:
1. The Head Master,
Govt. High School,
Arjunagi,
Bijapur Taluk & District.
2. The Vice Principal,
Govt. Junior College for Boys,
Bijapur-586101.
-2-
3. The Principal,
Govt. Junior College for Boys,
Bijapur-586101.
4. The Deputy Director of,
Public Instructions,
Bijapur-586101.
5. The Secretary,
K.S.E.E. Board and
Ex-Officio Joint Director
Of Public Instructions,
Belgaum Divn.,
Belgaum-590 001.
6. The Commissioner
for Public Instructions,
K.R. Circle,
Bangalore-560 001.
7. The Secretary to Govt. Karnataka,
Primary and Secondary Education,
M.S. Building,
Bangalore-560 001.
...Respondents
This writ petition is filed under articles 226 and
227 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ
of certiorari and to quash the order dated 06.03.2013
passed by the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal
Bangalore in application No.7504/2006 produced at
Annexure-A & etc.
This petition coming on for preliminary hearing
this day, ARAVIND KUMAR, J., made the following:-
-3-
ORDER
Petitioner had joined the service as Secondary School Assistant Grade-II in the year 1969 and on taking over these Ex-T.D.B. Institution by the Government, petitioner was absorbed into Government service w.e.f 1.4.1971 and had continued to discharge his work as such. During April 1996, Parliamentary elections came to be held on 27.4.1996 at Bijapur. Petitioner is said to have been deputed to discharge the election duties and it was the contention of the petitioner before the Administrative Tribunal that the Principal of the institution where petitioner was discharging as duties was inimical and to harass him he had not sanctioned leave and had not brought to the notice of the Deputy Commissioner, Bijapur about leave obtained by the petitioner on medical grounds and in the absence of such report, the Deputy Commissioner, Bijapur had appointed the petitioner as Presiding of one -4- of the polling stations and alleging that said order copy was not served on him and he was not communicated about such order of deputing him to election duty, petitioner is said to have not reported to election duty, which resulted in an order of suspension being passed on 27.4.1996 Annexure A-5 against petitioner. Thereafter, said order of suspension having been revoked on the basis of the representation submitted to the authorities, petitioner was reinstated into service and was transferred from his place of posting i.e, Government Boys Primary School, Bijapur to Government High School, Hannikeri, Tq. Bailahongala, Belgaum District and came to be relived on 24.7.1997 from the place where he was working. Later on, the petitioner is said to have not reported to the place of posting and subsequently on 25.3.1998 petitioner has reported to the place where he was deputed or transferred. His request for treating the period 25.7.1997 to 24.3.1998 as compulsory waiting period, -5- representations were submitted and by endorsement dated 11.11.2005 Annexure F-14, 5th respondent has rejected the claim of the petitioner and said period was ordered to be treated as leave without pay.
2. Being aggrieved by said endorsement, petitioner filed an application under Sec. 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 before the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal at Bangalore. Tribunal after having noticed that petitioner was fully aware of the order of posting, declined to entertain his prayer and rejected the application by the impugned order dated 6.3.2013 Annexure-A. Being aggrieved by the same, petitioner is before this Court.
3. We have heard Sri. Santosh H. Patil, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Sri. G.G. Chagashetti for petitioner and Sri. R.V. Nadagouda, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for respondents. Perused the records.
-6-
4. It is the contention of Sri. Santhosh H. Patil learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that representations had been submitted by the petitioner to the concerned authorities to continue his services in Government Junior College, Bijapur petitioner was never intimated of the order dated 19.7.1997 or order dated 24.7.1997 of being relieved from his place of posting, namely, Government Junior College for Boys, Bijapur to Government High School, Hannikeri, Tq. Bailahongala, Dist. Belgaum and as such on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice, impugned endorsement dated 11.11.2005 Annexure A-14 is sought for being quashed and to treat the period from 25.7.1997 to 24.3.1998 as compulsory waiting period with all consequential benefits.
5. Per contra, learned Additional Advocate General would support the orders passed by the -7- authorities as well as the Tribunal and prays for dismissal of the writ petition.
6. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the respondents and on perusal of the case paper and after bestowing our careful and anxious consideration to the rival contentions raised at the Bar, we are of the considered view that there is no merit in the writ petition and it is liable to be rejected for the reasons assigned herein below.
7. At the outset, it requires to be noticed that on order of suspension being revoked petitioner was relieved of his duties from Government Junior Boys College, Bijapur on 24.7.1997 and was posted to Government High School, Hannikeri, Tq. Bailahongala, Dist. Belagaum by order of Deputy Director, Public Instructions, Belgaum dated 19.7.1997. Pursuant to same, petitioner came to be relieved of his duties at Government Junior College, Bijapur as could be seen -8- from the endorsement dated 24.7.1997 Annexure A-8. These two orders were alleged by the petitioner as not having been served on him and this is an incorrect statement in as much as representations submitted by the petitioner on 25.7.1997 Annexure A-9 to the Deputy Director, Belgaum, would disclose that petitioner has clearly stated therein to the effect that Principal of Government Junior Boys College, Bijapur has relieved him of his duties on 24.7.1997 and the said transfer and posting is on account of inimical attitude of the Principal of said College. In other words he admits in his representation receipt of the order dated 19.7.1997 as well as the endorsement dated 24.7.1997, which have been issued to the petitioner. Despite receipt of the same, he did not report to the place where he was transferred or deputed namely Government High School, Hannikeri, Tq. Bailahongala, Dist. Belgaum till 25.3.1998. As such, said period i.e., from 25.7.1997 to 24.3.1998 has been held as not on duty and it is treated -9- as period leave without pay and no fault can be found in this regard. Petitioner being well aware of his posting to Government High School, Hannikeri, Tq. Bailahongala, Dist. Belgaum on being relived of his duties from Government Junior Boys College, Bijapur on 24.7.1997 did not report to the duty at the place of his posting till 25.4.1998. As such, Tribunal having opined that Rule 88 of Karnataka Civil Service Rules enables the appropriate authority to treat the period of absence of a government servant due to overstated joining time shall be treated as unauthorized absence in accordance with rule 106A of the said Rules has accordingly rejected the claim of the petitioner for treating the said period as compulsory waiting and has treated the same as not on duty or as leave without pay. The said finding of the authorities as well as the Tribunal cannot be faulted with as it is in consonance with extent rules. There is no illegality committed by the authorities or by the Tribunal, calling for interference at our hands in
- 10 -
exercise of our power under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.
No grounds made out to allow the petition. Hence, writ petition is hereby dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE Sd/-
JUDGE BL*