Karnataka High Court
The State Of Karnataka vs Praveen M. Anandakanda on 25 July, 2023
Author: P.S.Dinesh Kumar
Bench: P.S.Dinesh Kumar
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:25824-DB
WP No. 5838 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JULY, 2023
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.G. SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA
WRIT PETITION NO. 5838 OF 2022 (S-KSAT)
BETWEEN :
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
(HIGHER), M.S.BUILDING
BENGALURU-560 001
2. THE COMMISSIONER
COLLEGIATE EDUCATION
PALACE ROAD
BENGALURU-560 001 ...PETITIONERS
(BY SHRI. KIRAN KUMAR, HCGP)
Digitally signed by
YASHODHA N AND :
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA PRAVEEN M. ANANDAKANDA
S/O MAHABALESHWARA ANANDKANDA
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
WORKING AS ASSISTANT PROFESSOR
DEPARTMENT OF HINDI
GOVERNMENT FIRST GRADE COLLEGE
DAVANAGERE
RESIDING AT MCC 'B' BLOCK
DAVANGERE-577 004 ...RESPONDENT
(BY SHRI. S.V. GIRIKUMAR, ADVOCATE)
....
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:25824-DB
WP No. 5838 of 2022
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS
AND ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT
OR ORDER/DIRECTION TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED
03.03.2020 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE KSAT, BENGALURU IN
APPLICATION NO.1969/2017 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ISSUE ANY OTHER
APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDERS, DIRECTIONS OR SUCH OTHER SUITABLE
RELIEF OR RELIEFS.
THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN
'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, P.S.DINESH KUMAR, J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Heard Shri. Kiran Kumar, learned HCGP for petitioners and Shri. S.V. Girikumar, learned Advocate for respondent.
2. This writ petition by the State Government is filed for a writ of certiorari to set-aside the impugned order dated 03.03.2020 passed by KSAT1, Bengaluru.
3. During 2011-12, respondent was working as Assistant Professor of Hindi language at Government First Grade College. He was entrusted with the work of evaluation of Hindi Language papers. One of the papers evaluated by him belonged to Ms. Samreen Banu I. Deshanur. She was declared 'failed'. She filed an application for photocopy of her answer sheets and they were supplied. She found that 1 Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal -3- NC: 2023:KHC:25824-DB WP No. 5838 of 2022 6 answer sheets were missing. Based on her complaint, a Departmental enquiry was instituted against the respondent with a solitary charge that he was responsible for disappearance of six sheets in the answer book. In the Departmental enquiry, charge was not proved. A second show cause notice was issued on 04.05.2015 stating that he was responsible for disappearance of six sheets in the answer book. After considering his reply, the Disciplinary Authority imposed a penalty of withholding 5 increments with cumulative effect.
4. Respondent challenged the penalty order before the KSAT. By the impugned order, the KSAT has allowed the application and set-aside the penalty order. Feeling aggrieved, State Government have preferred this writ petition.
5. Shri. Kiran Kumar, learned HCGP submitted that the respondent had deliberately caused disappearance of six sheets in the answer book. He sought to rely upon Appendix-2 appended to the charge sheet dated 30.08.2013 -4- NC: 2023:KHC:25824-DB WP No. 5838 of 2022 and contended that there was enough reason for the respondent to cause disappearance of answer sheets because, he had behaved in an inappropriate manner with the candidate and he was warned by the Principal for the said misconduct. The KSAT has allowed the application on technical grounds. If the said order is sustained, the students will lose faith in the examination system. With these main submissions, he sought for allowing this writ petition.
6. Shri. Girikumar, for the respondent, submitted that the charge against the delinquent official is that he has caused disappearance of six sheets in the answer book. The same is mentioned in the second show cause notice. Admittedly, the Enquiry Officer has held that the charge was not proved. However, the Disciplinary Authority, on an incorrect assumption that the charge was proved has passed the penalty order and the KSAT has rightly set-aside the said order. Hence, no interference is called for.
7. We have carefully considered rival contentions and perused the records.
-5-
NC: 2023:KHC:25824-DB WP No. 5838 of 2022
8. Undisputed facts of the case are, only one charge was leveled against the first respondent namely that he was responsible for disappearance of six sheets in the answer book. The same is mentioned in the second show cause notice also. The Enquiry Officer has held that the charge was not proved. However, the Disciplinary Authority has recorded in the preamble of the order that the charge was 'proved' and on this specific premise, the penalty order withholding of five increments has been passed. Therefore, in our considered opinion, the KSAT has rightly allowed the application and the same does not call for any interference.
Resultantly, this writ petition fails and it is dismissed. No costs.
Sd/-
JUDGE Sd/-
JUDGE SPS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 63