Karnataka High Court
Sri. M. Raghu vs The State Of Karnataka on 21 July, 2022
Author: S. Sunil Dutt Yadav
Bench: S. Sunil Dutt Yadav
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JULY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV
WRIT PETITION No.13703/2022 (S-PRO)
BETWEEN:
SRI M. RAGHU
S/O LATE K. MUNILINGAIAH
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS
WORKING AS ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
(IN-CHARGE)
OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
(PROJECT)
BOMANAHALLI DIVISION
BRUHATH BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE
BANGALORE - 560 068.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI SATISH K., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT
VIKASA SOUDHA
BANGALORE - 560 001.
2. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER
BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE
N.R. SQUARE,
BANGALORE - 560 002.
2
3. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER
(ADMINISTRATION)
BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE
N.R. SQUARE,
BANGALORE - 560 002.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY MS. NAGASHREE M.C., AGA FOR R1)
*****
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS
FROM THE RESPONDENTS AND DIRECT THE R1 TO CONSIDER
THE CASE OF THE PETITIONER FOR PROMOTION TO THE POST
OF ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (CIVIL), DIVISION-II AND
PROMOTE HIM TO THE SAID POST RETROSPECTIVELY FROM THE
DATE HIS JUNIORS ARE PROMOTED I.E., FROM 22.06.2022
ANNEXURE-Q AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT, MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Petitioner was appointed as Second Division Assistant in the 2nd respondent - Corporation on 30.12.1999 and was promoted to the post of Junior Engineer in the year 2013. It is submitted that on 19.11.2014, a charge memo was issued and proceedings were initiated under Rule 11 of the Karnataka Civil Service (Classification, Control and Appeal) 3 Rules 1957 as regards certain allegations pertaining to demolition of Sri. Puttanna Kanagal Cinema Theatre.
2. It is submitted that in light of delay in conclusion of enquiry proceedings and as the petitioner's promotional avenues were prejudiced, petitioner approached this Court in W.P.No.41234/2018 wherein petitioner had sought for issuance of writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer. The said writ petition came to be disposed off on 17.06.2019 while observing that the respondents were required to conclude the enquiry proceedings within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the order, failing which the petitioner shall be promoted to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer, if he is otherwise eligible. The co-ordinate Bench of this Court has referred to the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of State of Punjab and others vs. Chaman Lal Goyal - 1995 (2) SCC 570.
4
3. Petitioner submits that the enquiry proceedings were not concluded within the period of 3 months as ordered by this Court in W.P.No.41234/2018 and was concluded only on 23.01.2020, whereby the penalty order was passed reverting the petitioner from the post of Junior Engineer to the Post of Work Inspector. It is further submitted that the said order of 23.01.2020 was challenged in W.P.No.2509/2020 and this Court by order dated 03.02.2020 stayed the penalty order at Annexure-F. It is further submitted that in light of the order of stay, petitioner's right for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer was considered as per the order at Annexure-L. Petitioner submits that such order at Annexure-L was passed taking note of the interim order passed in W.P.No.2509/2020.
4. It is submitted that promotion from the post of Assistant Engineer to the Post of Assistant Executive Engineer-Division II, the enquiry proceedings as regards the colleagues of the petitioner has been concluded and they 5 have been promoted, but the case of the petitioner for promotion from Assistant Engineer to Assistant Executive Engineer-Division II, has been deferred as per the proceedings at Annexure-N. The petitioner submits that on an earlier occasion, after noticing the interim order of the Co-ordinate Bench, petitioner's promotion to Assistant Engineer having been considered as per the order at Annexure-L, further promotion to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer-Division II, cannot be postponed.
5. There is substantial force in the contention of the petitioner.
6. It is noticed that this Court in W.P.No.41234/2018 has specifically observed that there has been delay in conclusion of the enquiry proceedings as a charge memo was issued in the year 2014 itself. The Court has clearly specified that if the proceedings were not concluded within a period of three months, petitioner is to be promoted to the Post of Assistant Executive Engineer, if he is otherwise eligible. Despite of the order of this Court in 6 W.P.No.41234/2018, proceedings were concluded only on 23.01.2020. Clearly, there has been delay in conclusion of the enquiry proceedings. Once the case of the petitioner for promotion at an earlier point of time despite the pendency of the enquiry was considered to the post of Assistant Engineer as per the order at Annexure-L, the same logic is to be extended as regards to the next promotional avenue of Assistant Executive Engineer-Division II.
7. Accordingly, taking note of the delay in conclusion of the enquiry and also the interim order passed by this Court staying the enquiry proceedings, respondent No.1 to consider the case of the petitioner as regards the further promotion from Assistant Engineer to Assistant Executive Engineer-Division II without reference to the observations made at paragraph No.9 of the proceedings at Annexure-N, if the petitioner is otherwise eligible for promotion. Needless to state that such promotion if affected as per the applicable procedure would be subject to orders to be passed in W.P.No.2509/2020.
7
8. Accordingly, the petition is disposed off. It is made clear that this order is passed in the peculiar facts of the case and is not to be treated as precedent.
Sd/-
JUDGE VP