Karnataka High Court
N T Prasanna Kumar vs State Of Karnataka on 17 November, 2020
Author: P.B.Bajanthri
Bench: P.B. Bajanthri
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2020
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.B. BAJANTHRI
WRIT PETITION NO.33855/2015(GM-KLA)
BETWEEN:
N.T PRASANNA KUMAR
AGED 55 YEARS,
S/O B THIMAPPA
SHIRESTEDAR,
BANGALORE NORTH TALUK,
TALUK OFFICE, BANGALORE
RESIDING AT NO.24, 14TH MAIN,
4TH BLOCK, NANDINI LAYOUT,
BANGALORE - 96. ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SWAROOP ANAND, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REVENUE DEPARTMENT
M.S. BUILDING,
DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BANGALORE - 560 001
(REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY)
2. REGISTRAR OFFICE OF
THE UPA LOKAYUKTA
M.S. BUILDINGS,
DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BANGALORE - 560 001
3. ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR
(ENQUIRIES - 3)
KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA
M.S. BUILDINGS,
2
DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BANGALORE - 560 001 ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. T.P. SRINIVASA, AGA FOR R1
SRI. G. DEVARAJ, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3)
THIS WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASH THE NOTICE DT.17.10.2014 VIDE ANNX-E ISKSUED
BY THE R-1 AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING - B GROUP PHYSICAL HEARING / VIDEO
CONFERENCING HEARING (OPTIONAL), THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER
In the instant petition, petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:-
1. Quash the notice dated 17-10-2014 vide Annexure "E" issued by the first respondent.
2. Quash the enquiry report issued by the 3rd Respondent vide Annexure "D".
3. Grant such other reliefs as the situation demands, to meet the ends of justice.
2. On 10.11.2020, none appeared for the petitioner so also today none appears for the petitioner.
3
3. Undisputedly, petitioner is in the cadre of Sheristedar working in the Taluk Office, Bangalore North Taluk, Revenue Department, Bangalore. Petitioner's grievance is required to be redressed before the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal in view of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.
4. The Apex Court in the case of L.Chandra Kumar vs. Union of India reported in (1997) 3 SCC 261 and this Court in the case of Sri.Shivaprasad Biradar vs. Karnataka Lokayukta and others in W.A.No.200715/2018 (S-DE) and B.Suresh Vs. State of Karnataka and others reported in 2002(5) KLJ 202 (DB). In the case of Sri.B.Suresh Vs. State of Karnataka and others. Paragraphs 8 and 9 held as under:-
"8. We are fortified in this view by decision in Piar Chand v. Himachal Pradesh Public Service Commission, where a Division Bench of the Himachal Pradesh High Court considered an identical question and held that service under the Public Service Commission is a 'Civil Service' of the State and members of its staff 4 are holding civil posts under the State. The following observations are relevant:
"The State, referred to in Article 323A and Section 15 of the Administrative Tribunals Act cannot be, equated with the Government; the Government being only a limb of the State. It is true that the Public Service Commission is an independent body established under Article 315 of the Constitution..... The functions of the Public Service Commission are enumerated in Article 320 of the Constitution. The Public Service Commission though independent of the Government is also an organ of the State machinery and service under the State Public Service Commission is part of the Civil Service of the State".
9. We therefore, direct that these two petitions be transferred to the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal for disposal in accordance with law."
5. In view of the aforesaid principle laid down by this Court and the Apex Court, the present petition is transmitted to Karnataka Administrative Tribunal.
Registry is hereby directed to transmit the writ papers to the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal. Karnataka Administrative Tribunal is requested to re-number this writ petition into application and 5 make all necessary endeavour to decide the petitioner's application at the earliest. Accordingly, writ petition stands disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE KPS