Disposed

K N Chandraprabha v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC15 Sept 2021WP/1655/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition on the assurance by the cooperative society that the petitioner's service conditions would not be altered disadvantageously until the enquiry concludes. The court directed the society not to enforce any adverse order for two weeks to allow the petitioner to file a representation.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner is permitted to file representation within two weeks. The respondent society is restrained from altering the petitioner's service conditions during the pending enquiry and from executin

K N Chandraprabha Vs State of Karnataka — Service and Employment | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2021

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.1655 OF 2021 (CS-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

K.N. CHANDRAPRABHA, W/O N.SHIVANNA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, RESIDING AT KAMMASANDRA VILLAGE, MADURE HOBLI, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 561 203.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. RAMANJANEYA.V, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. HARSHA D. JOSHI, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION, M.S. BUILDING, BANGALORE - 560 001.

¶13

2 . REGISTRAR CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES KARNATAKA, OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES KARNATAKA, ALI ASKAR ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001.

¶14

3 . KAMMASANDRA MILK PRODUCERS WOMEN CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED, REPRESENTING BY ITS SECRETARY, KAMMASANDRA, MADHURE HOBLI, DODDABALLAPUR TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 561 203.

¶15

4 . THE ENQUIRY OFFICER, KAMMASANDRA MILK PRODUCERS

¶16

¶17

WOMEN CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED, KAMMASANDRA, MADHURE HOBLI, DODDABALLAPUR TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 561 203.

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SRI. VINOD KUMAR, AGA FOR R1 & R2; SRI. N.RAMACHANDRA, ADVOCATE FOR R3; R4 - SERVED & UNREPRESENTED)

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DTD 13.06.2020 ISSUED BY THE R-3 BY WHICH THE R-3 HAS APPOINTED THE R-4 AS AN ENQUIRY OFFICER VICE ANNXP; AND ETC.

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

ORDER

¶23

The essential grievance of the petitioner regardless of the averments in the petition in a little invariance is that he may be terminated from the service on the completion of a disciplinary enquiry when he is yet to file his representation against findings in the enquiry report in terms of Hon'ble Apex Court decision in UNION Of INDIA & ORS. Vs. MOHD.

¶24

RAMZAN KHAN, (1991) 1 SCC 588 . A co-ordinate Bench of this Court had granted interim protection to the petitioner.

¶25

After service of notice, respondent Nos.1 & 2 are represented by learned AGA, Sri. Vinod Kumar. The contesting respondent No.3 is represented by Senior Panel Counsel who having opposed the writ petition for some time

¶26

¶27

now submits that no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner till after culmination of the enquiry proceedings that are now interdicted by the interim order; therefore, the petition may be disposed off permitting the respondentSociety to take appropriate action based upon the enquiry report after obtaining the representation from the petitioneremployee thereto. This stand is fair enough.

¶28

In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed off on the assurance of respondent No.3-Society that the petitioner's service conditions as obtaining at the initiation of the impugned proceeds shall not be altered to his disadvantage till after the enquiry proceeding is completed by the issuance of order punitive or otherwise;

¶29

In the interest of justice respondent No.3-Society is directed not to give effect to the order that may be passed adverse to the petitioner, for a period of two weeks after it is served on him so that he can avail appropriate remedy against the same.

¶30

¶31

It is open to the petitioner to file his representation to

¶32

the enquiry report within two weeks. All contentions are kept

open.

No costs.

Sd/JUDGE