S B Kotabagi vs Hubli Dharwad Municipal Corporation on 7 January, 2013

[Cites 5, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

S B Kotabagi vs Hubli Dharwad Municipal Corporation on 7 January, 2013

Bench: N.Ananda

                        :1:




       IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
          CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD

DATED THIS THE 07 t h DAY OF JANUARY, 2013

                     BEFORE

        THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANANDA

     WRIT PETITION No.2942 OF 2007 [S-DI S]

BETWEEN:

      S B KOTABAGI
      AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
      S/O BHOJAPPA
      WORKING AS II DIVISION ASSITANT
      AT HUBLI DHARWAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
      HUBLI-20 AND RESIDING NEAR SRI MANJUNATH
      TEMPLE, KRISHNAPUR ONI,
      OLD HUBLI 580024, DHARWAD DISTRICT
                                      ... PETITIONER
(By Sri. V M SHEELVANT ADV.)

AND:

1.    HUBLI DHARWAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
      HUBLI-580020
      REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER

2.    STATE OF KARNATAKA
      BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO
      GOVERNMENT IN THE
      URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
      M.S.BUILDINGS,
                        :2:




    DR.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
    BANGALORE-560 001.
                                   ... RESPONDENTS
(By Sri. R G DEVADHAR ADV. FOR R1;
      SMT.MEGHA.C.KOLEKAR, HCGP FOR R2)

     THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO:

     1. DECLARE RULE 14(i) OF THE KARNATAKA
        CIVIL   SERVICES     (CLASSIFICATION,
        CONTROL AND APPEAL) RULES, 1957 IS
        UNCONSTITUTIONAL,    UNLAWFUL    AND
        UNENFORCEABLE.

       OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE

       READ DOWN THE SAID RULE AND DECLARE
       THAT BEFORE IMPOSING ANY PENALTY
       UNDER RULE 14(i) OF THE KARNATAKA
       CIVIL    SERVICES     (CLASSIFICATION,
       CONTROL AND APPEAL) RULES, 1957 THE
       GOVT. SERVANT SHALL BE GIVEN AN
       OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE A REPRESENTATION
       BY ISSUING HIM A NOTICE SETTING OUT
       GROUNDS ON WHICH IT IS PROPOSED TO
       TAKE ACTION AGAINST HIM.

     2. QUASH ORDER DT. 2.2.2007 VIDE ANNEX.J.
        ISSUED  BY   R1    AND    GRANT   ALL
        CONSEQUENTIAL BENEFITS.

      This writ petition coming on for Preliminary
Hearing in 'B' Group this day, the Court made the
following:
                            :3:




                       O R D E R

In the departmental enquiry, petitioner was not held guilty of charges leveled against him. However, in criminal case [Spl.(SVC) C.C. No.14/1996], petitioner was held guilty of offences punishable under Sections 7 & 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act'). The petitioner was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- with default sentence of three months for offence punishable under Section 7 of the Act. He was also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- with default sentence of three months for offences punishable under Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Act. :4:

2. The respondents, taking notice of conviction of petitioner, dismissed him from service, however subject to result of Criminal Appeal No.1539/2004, which was preferred by petitioner against the judgment of conviction in Spl. (SVC) C.C. No.14/1996.

3. On 11.01.2011, this Court accepted the Criminal Appeal No.1539/2004 and set aside the judgment of conviction in Spl.(SVC)C.C. No.14/1996. The State has not challenged the judgment of acquittal.

4. In view of this development, the petition is accepted. The respondents are directed to reinstate the petitioner, however without backwages.

Sd/-

JUDGE RK/-

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court