Allowed

Railway Muslim Employees v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC8 Nov 2022WP/109397/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment dismisses the State Government's appeal against the cancellation of a salary grant to the petitioner's institute. Finding that the employee involved had already been dismissed and that the department failed to follow the prescribed procedure and implicated the entire institution, the Court quashed the cancellation order.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order cancelling salary grant to the institution quashed. Respondent No.2 directed to continue extending the grant-in-aid to the petitioners in accordance with law.

Railway Muslim Employees Vs the State of… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

WP No. 109397 of 2019 C/W WP No. 110116 of 2019

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO.109397 OF 2019 (EDN-GIA) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 110116 OF 2019

¶8

In WP NO.109397/2019

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

RAILWAY MUSLIM EMPLOYEES EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, SRI.GHOUSE MOHIDDIN H BEOPARI, AGED ABOUT: 78 YEARS, SIMLA NAGAR, CITB PLOTS, DEVARGUDIHAL ROAD, OLD HUBBALLI, HUBBALLI-580024.

¶11

THE PRINCIPAL TIPPU SHAHEED INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY (POLYTECHNIC), SIMLA NAGAR, CITB PLOTS, DEVARGUDIHAL ROAD, OLD HUBBALLI, HUBBALLI-580024.

¶12

…PETITIONERS

¶13

(BY SRI. SUNIL S DESAI.,ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

Digitally signed by SUJATASUBHASH PAMMAR SUJATASUBHASHPAMMAR Location: Highcourt ofKarnataka,Dharwad Bench, Dharwad Date: 2022.11.24 11:20:54 -0800

¶16

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AREP. BY ITS UNDER SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION, (TECHNICAL EDUCATION), M.S. BUILDNIG, BENGALURU-560001.

¶17

THE DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, PALACE ROAD, BENGALURU-560001.

¶18

¶19

WP No. 109397 of 2019 C/W WP No. 110116 of 2019

¶20

THE JOINT DIRECTOR (ADMINISTRATION), DEPARTMENT OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, PALACE ROAD, BENGALURU-560001.

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SRI. M.H.PATI, ADDL. GOVT. ADVOCATE FOR R1-R3)

¶23

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER BEARING NO.ED 93 TPE 2016 BENGALURU DATED 30.03.2019 PASSED BY THE 1^ST RESPONDENT AS PER ANNEXURE-Q AS ARBITRARY ILLEGAL AND VOID; ISSUE CONSEQUENTIAL DIRECTIONS TO THE RESPONDENT TO IMMEDIATELY RELEASE SALARY GRANT TO THE 2^ND PETITIONER TIPPU SHAHEED INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY (POLYTECHNIC) AND TO PASS APPROPRAITE SUTITABLE ORDERS IN THE INTERET AND EQUITY.

¶24

IN WP NO.110116/2019

¶25

RAVINDER SINGH ATTER S/O TEKCHAND, AGE: 51 YEARS, HOD, CIVIL ENGENEERING DEPARTMENT, TIPPU SHAHEED INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, POLYTECHNIC SIMLANAGAR, OLD HUBLI, HUBBALLI-580024.

¶26

MANJUNATH A YADWAD S/O ATMARAM YADWAD, AGE: 48 YEARS, SELECTION GRADE LECTURER AUTOMOBILE ENGENEERING, TIPPU SHAHEED INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, POLYTECHNIC SIMLANAGAR, OLD HUBLI, HUBBALLI-580024.

¶27

RAVI L ALAGODI S/O LAGAMAPPA ALAGODI,

¶28

¶29

WP No. 109397 of 2019 C/W WP No. 110116 of 2019

¶30

AGE: 51 YEARS, SELECTION GRADE LECTURER CIVIL ENGENEERING, TIPPU SHAHEED INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, POLYTECHNIC SIMLANAGAR, OLD HUBLI, HUBBALLI-580024.

¶31

MUNIRAHMED BEPAERI S/O GOUSE MOHIDDIN, AGE: 39 YEARS, SECOND DIVISIONAL CLERK, TIPPU SHAHEED INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, POLYTECHNIC SIMLANAGAR, OLD HUBLI, HUBBALLI-580024.

¶32

SAYEDALI H PEERZADE S/O HABIBULLA PEERZADE, AGE: 51 YEARS, SECOND DIVISIONAL CLERK, TIPPU SHAHEED INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, POLYTECHNIC SIMLANAGAR, OLD HUBLI, HUBBALLI-580024.

¶33

CHANDRASHEKHAR A TUPPAD S/O ASHOK C TUPPAD, AGE: 44 YEARS, HOD, AUTOMOBILE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, TIPPU SHAHEED INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, POLYTECHNIC SIMLANAGAR, OLD HUBLI, HUBBALLI-580024.

¶34

MOHAN B HAMPIHOLI S/O BASAPPA HAMPIHOLI, AGE: 49 YEARS, SELECTION GRADE LECTURER AUTOMOBILE ENGINEERING,

¶35

¶36

WP No. 109397 of 2019 C/W WP No. 110116 of 2019

¶37

TIPPU SHAHEED INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, POLYTECHNIC SIMLANAGAR, OLD HUBLI, HUBBALLI-580024.

¶38

MOHAMMADALI A BAGALKOT S/O ABDULKHADAR BAGALKOT, AGE: 44 YEARS, SELECTION GRADE LECTURER CIVIL ENGINEERING, TIPPU SHAHEED INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, POLYTECHNIC SIMLANAGAR, OLD HUBLI, HUBBALLI-580024.

¶39

NANDINI C BELLAD W/O B M SHESHGIRI, AGE: 58 YEARS, SELECTION GRADE LECTURER CIVIL ENGINEERING, TIPPU SHAHEED INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, POLYTECHNIC SIMLANAGAR, OLD HUBLI, HUBBALLI-580024.

¶40

M B RAVI S/O M BHEEMAPPA, AGE: 49 YEARS, SELECTION GRADE LECTURER E and C ENGINEERING, TIPPU SHAHEED INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, POLYTECHNIC SIMLANAGAR, OLD HUBLI, HUBBALLI-580024.

¶41

BASAVARAJ KARIYAPPA KABBER AGE: 48 YEARS, SELECTION GRADE LECTURER MECHANICAL ENGINEERING, TIPPU SHAHEED INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, POLYTECHNIC SIMLANAGAR,

¶42

¶43

WP No. 109397 of 2019 C/W WP No. 110116 of 2019

¶44

OLD HUBLI, HUBBALLI-580024.

¶45

SURESH CHUDAPPAGOUDA PATIL AGE: 45 YEARS, SELECTION GRADE LECTURER MECHANICAL ENGINEERING, TIPPU SHAHEED INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, POLYTECHNIC SIMLANAGAR, OLD HUBLI, HUBBALLI-580024.

¶46

SHAKANTALA BEEMSINGH KITTUR AGE: 51 YEARS, SELECTION GRADE LECTURER CIVIL ENGINEERING, TIPPU SHAHEED INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, POLYTECHNIC SIMLANAGAR, OLD HUBLI, HUBBALLI-580024.

¶47

BALESH SIDDAPPA HEGGANNAVAR AGE: 43 YEARS, SELECTION GRADE LECTURER SCIENCE ENGINEERING, TIPPU SHAHEED INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, POLYTECHNIC SIMLANAGAR, OLD HUBLI, HUBBALLI-580024.

¶48

MALLAPPA SHANKARAPPA SOMANAKATTI AGE: 52 YEARS, SELECTION GRADE LECTURER MECHANICAL ENGINEERING, TIPPU SHAHEED INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, POLYTECHNIC SIMLANAGAR, OLD HUBLI, HUBBALLI-580024.

¶49

MOHAMMED SADIQUE BANKAPUR AGE: 54 YEARS, SELECTION GRADE LECTURER

¶50

¶51

WP No. 109397 of 2019 C/W WP No. 110116 of 2019

¶52

CIVIL ENGINEERING, TIPPU SHAHEED INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, POLYTECHNIC SIMLANAGAR, OLD HUBLI, HUBBALLI-580024.

¶53

AKBARSAB DAVALSAB ALLADABAI AGE: 44 YEARS, HELPER, TIPPU SHAHEED INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, POLYTECHNIC SIMLANAGAR, OLD HUBLI, HUBBALLI-580024.

¶54

AKBAR MEHEBOODGANI BILEKUDARI AGE: 51 YEARS, SELECTION GRADE LECTURER E and C ENGINEERING, TIPPU SHAHEED INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, POLYTECHNIC SIMLANAGAR, OLD HUBLI, HUBBALLI-580024.

¶55

YALLAPPA FAKKIRAPPA HAVERI AGE: 47 YEARS, OCC: TYPIST, TIPPU SHAHEED INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, POLYTECHNIC SIMLANAGAR, OLD HUBLI, HUBBALLI-580024.

¶56

ANNAPPA BASAPPA PANKAPUR AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: PEON, TIPPU SHAHEED INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, POLYTECHNIC SIMLANAGAR, OLD HUBLI, HUBBALLI-580024.

¶57

VINAYAK SHAMRAO NAIK AGE: 51 YEARS,

¶58

¶59

WP No. 109397 of 2019 C/W WP No. 110116 of 2019

¶60

SELECTION GRADE LECTURER AUTOMOBILE ENGINEERING, TIPPU SHAHEED INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, POLYTECHNIC SIMLANAGAR, OLD HUBLI, HUBBALLI-580024.

¶61

NAGARAJ NINGAPPA SANNULI AGE: 47 YEARS, ASSISTANT INSTRUCTOR, TIPPU SHAHEED INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, POLYTECHNIC SIMLANAGAR, OLD HUBLI, HUBBALLI-580024.

¶62

SHAMSHUDDIN SAYED HASHIM TANDUR AGE: 59 YEARS, OCC: MECHANIC, TIPPU SHAHEED INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, POLYTECHNIC SIMLANAGAR, OLD HUBLI, HUBBALLI-580024.

¶63

HAROONJAFAR ABUBKAR DUKANDAR AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: ASSISTANT INSTRUCTOR, TIPPU SHAHEED INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, POLYTECHNIC SIMLANAGAR, OLD HUBLI, HUBBALLI-580024.

¶64

ZAHURAHMED ABDULMAJEED KHAN KITTUR AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: FDA, TIPPU SHAHEED INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, POLYTECHNIC SIMLANAGAR, OLD HUBLI, HUBBALLI-580024.

¶65

KIRAN KUMAR YASHWANT MANTUR AGE: 47 YEARS,

¶66

¶67

WP No. 109397 of 2019 C/W WP No. 110116 of 2019

¶68

SELECTION GRADE LECTURER MECHANICAL ENGINEERING, TIPPU SHAHEED INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, POLYTECHNIC SIMLANAGAR, OLD HUBLI, HUBBALLI-580024.

¶69

RIYAZAHMED ABDU LATEEF DAFEDAR AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: OFFICE ASSISTANT, TIPPU SHAHEED INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, POLYTECHNIC SIMLANAGAR, OLD HUBLI, HUBBALLI-580024.

¶70

SURESH S S S/O SADSHIVAPPA S K, AGE: 46 YEARS, SELECTION GRADE LECTURER E and C ENGINEERING, TIPPU SHAHEED INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, POLYTECHNIC SIMLANAGAR, OLD HUBLI, HUBBALLI-580024.

¶71

SHARANAPPA S/O BHIMSHEEPA AGE: 41 YEARS, OCC: HELLPER TIPPU SHAHEED INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, POLYTECHNIC SIMLANAGAR, OLD HUBLI, HUBBALLI-580024.

¶72

…PETITIONERS

¶73

(BY SRI. ARAVIND D.KULKARNI, ADVOCATE)

¶74

AND:

¶75

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS UNDER SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION (TECHNICAL EDUCATION), M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001.

¶76

¶77

WP No. 109397 of 2019 C/W WP No. 110116 of 2019

¶78

THE DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, PALACE ROAD, BENGALURU-560001.

¶79

THE JOINT DIRECTOR (ADMINISTRATION) DEPARTMENT OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, PALACE ROAD, BENGALURU-560001.

¶80

RAILWAY MUSLIM EMPLOYEES EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATION REP BY ITS PRESIDENT, SRI GHOUSE MOHIDDIN H BEOPARI, AGE: 78 YEARS, SIMLA NAGAR, CITB PLOTS, DEVARGUDIHAL ROAD, OLD HUBBALLI, HUBBALLI-580024.

¶81

THE PRINCIPAL TIPPU SHAHEED INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY (POLYTECHNIC), SIMLA NAGAR, CITB PLOTS, DEVARGUDIHAL ROAD, OLD HUBBALLI, HUBBALLI-580024.

¶82

…RESPONDENTS

¶83

(BY SRI. M.H.PATI, ADDL. GOVT. ADVOCATE R1-R3 SRI. SUNIL DESAI, ADVOCATE FOR R4 & R5)

¶84

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER BEARING NO.ED 93 TPE 2016 BANGALURU DATED 30.03.2019 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDNET AS PER ANNEXURE-L AS ARBITRARY, ILLEGAL AND VOID.

¶85

THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶86

10 -

¶87

WP No. 109397 of 2019 C/W WP No. 110116 of 2019

¶88

ORDER

¶89

The State Government accorded permission to the petitioner No.1-Association (in W.P. No.109397/2019) for establishing Polytechnic Institute/College and upon the permission granted, the petitioner-association established Polytechnic Institute/College and the institution was admitted to grant-in-aid with effect from 03.03.2001 and also the staffing pattern was approved by the Government on 10.01.2003.

¶90

In 2014, an unknown person filed a complaint before the Karnataka Lokayukta making allegations against the institute/college and its staff and the Lokayukta, after holding an enquiry, submitted a report with the 2^nd respondent to initiate action against one of the employees of the institute/college run by the petitioner-association stating that he was drawing salary from two institutions including the one run by the petitioner-association. Thereafter, the 2^nd respondent issued a show cause notice to the employee calling upon him to explain as to why action should not be initiated. The said employee replied to the show cause notice contending

¶91

11 -

¶92

WP No. 109397 of 2019 C/W WP No. 110116 of 2019

¶93

that he has already deposited the amount and requested for dropping the proceedings by taking into account 34 years of service rendered by him. The 2^nd respondent withheld salary of the said employee and released the same in the month of February 2018.

¶94

Thereafter, the 2^nd respondent issued notice to the petitioner-association for not taking action against the employee and further directed to initiate departmental enquiry and report the same to the authority within a week. The first petitioner suitably replied to the 2^nd respondent sating that penalty of withholding one increment is passed against the employee. Such being the case, the 2^nd respondent recommended with the 1^st respondent for cancellation of the grant-in-aid on the ground that no suitable action has been taken against the employee. The petitioner submitted a representation with the 1^st respondent stating that three increments of the said employee has been withheld and further requested to continue the grant in favour of the petitioner. The 1^st respondent, without considering the representation, cancelled the grant extended to the petitioner. Taking exception to the same, the Association and the Principal of the

¶95

12 -

¶96

WP No. 109397 of 2019 C/W WP No. 110116 of 2019

¶97

Polytechnic Institute are before this Court in W.P.

¶98

No.109397/2019 and the employees of Polytechnic Institute in W.P. No.110116/2019.

¶99

I have examined the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the State.

¶100

The Department of Technical Education had issued notice in the year 2016 against one of the employees of the institution for drawing certain sums unlawfully causing loss to the exchequer. The employee appeared before the concerned authorities and deposited the amount alleged to have been drawn unlawfully. Thereafter, the authorities, who had withheld the salary of the said employee, disbursed the withheld amount and continued to pay the regular salary. Therefore, the institute was under a bonafide impression that the dispute had attained quietus. Thereafter, the 2^nd respondent issued another notice, and Polytechnic Institute, acting upon such notice, held enquiry and passed an order of penalty withholding three increments. The 1^st respondent without taking into account that the petitioner-institution has taken punitive measures in

¶101

13 -

¶102

WP No. 109397 of 2019 C/W WP No. 110116 of 2019

¶103

withholding increment, has passed the impugned order without issuing notice to the petitioner.

¶104

It is also undisputed that during the pendency of this writ petition, an enquiry was initiated against the said employee and thereafter, the said employee has been dismissed from service with effect from 11.11.2021. Even assuming that the petitioner-institution has not taken any action for dismissing the said employee from service, the 1^st respondent committed an error in canceling the grant-in-aid to the petitioner-institution instead of confining the stoppage of grant-in-aid extended to the said employee. Hence, the impugned order passed by the 1^st respondent canceling grant-in-aid to all the employees of the institution/college run by the petitioner-association is impermissible and contrary to provisions of Grant-in-Aid Code. The Government having released salary of the said employee, which was withheld, could not have passed the impugned order canceling the salary grant to all the employees of the petitioner-institution. Having regard to the fact that the said employee has been dismissed from service, the impugned order passed by the 1^st respondent is not sustainable in law. Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶105

14 -

¶106

WP No. 109397 of 2019 C/W WP No. 110116 of 2019

¶107

ORDER

¶108

The writ petitions are allowed. The impugned order dated 30.03.2019 passed by the 1^st respondent at Annexure-Q in Writ Petition No.109397/2019, and at Annexure-L in Writ Petition No.110116/2019 is hereby quashed.

¶109

The respondent No.2 shall continue to extend the grant-in-aid to petitioners in accordance with law.

¶110

Sd/JUDGE

¶111

KMS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 116

Railway Muslim Employees v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Railway Muslim Employees v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Yallareddeppa S/O Eshwarappa Madnoor Vs the Acb Police by Ballari Police Station Ballari

Shri. Fakkiresh S/O Veerappa Baligar Vs the State of Karnataka

Dr. Chandrashekar S/O. Sharanapap Neeralagi Vs Vadeyar Sreedhar S/O Rohith Swamy

Sandip S/O. Pundalik Yalgukar Vs Staff Selection Commission

Ravinder Singh Atter Vs the State of Karnataka

Pralhad B Kulkarni Vs M/S.Godrej Agrovet Ltd.