Disposed

Shri Parashuram S/O Kudleppa Gudadari v. the Director of Municipal Administration for State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC13 Sept 2024WP/103201/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging a report submitted by the Deputy Commissioner initiating a joint enquiry. The Court held that challenging the report itself was not tenable as disciplinary proceedings had not yet commenced and Articles of Charge were not yet issued.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was disposed of with all contentions kept open for the case if departmental proceedings are initiated; no order quashing the report was made.

Shri Parashuram S/O Kudleppa Gudadari Vs the… — Service and Employment | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC-D:13099 WP No. 103201 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO.103201 OF 2023 (S-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SHRI PARASHURAM S/O. KUDLEPPA GUDADARI, AGE: 47 YERS, OCC: OFFICE MANAGER, NOW WORKING AS CHIEF OFFICER, TMC HANAGAL, DI33+ST: HAVERI, PIN CODE: 581 104.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI R.K.KULKARNI, ADV.)

¶12

AND:

¶13

THE DIRECTOR OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION FOR STATE OF KARNATAKA, 9^TH FLOOR, MINI VISHWESHWARAYYA TOWER,

¶14

DR. B. R. AMBEDKAR ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 001.

¶15

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DHARWAD DISTRICT DHARWAD, PIN CODE: 580 001.

¶16

Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶17

SMT. GEETA W/O. SUDHIR CHAVAN @ SMT. GEETA D/O. TIPPANNASA MEHARWADE, AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O: ALANAVAR, DISTRICT: DHARWAD, PIN CODE: 581 103.

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SRI P.N.HATTI, HCGP FOR R1 AND R2)

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO, ISSUE AN ORDER OR WRIT OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 AGAINST THE PETITIONER AT ANNEXURE-H, SO FAR AS IT RELATES TO THE PETITIONER IN THE INTERESTS OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC.,

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶22

2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:13099 WP No. 103201 of 2023

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

Challenging report submitted by respondent no.2 as per Annexure-H insofar as it relates to petitioner, this writ petition is filed.

¶25

Sri R.K.Kulkarni, learned counsel for petitioner submitted while working as Chief Officer at T.M.C., Alanavar, petitioner was issued with show-cause notice dated 16.04.2022 as per Annexure-F. It was submitted, stating that he had not committed misconduct alleged he submitted reply on 31.05.2022 as per Annexure-G.

¶26

But, without proper consideration, respondent no.2-Deputy Commissioner submitted report to Director of Municipal Administration for holding joint enquiry against petitioner and others. It was submitted, since petitioner had not committed any misconduct, petitioner was questioning said report.

¶27

Sri P.N.Hatti, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondents no.1 and 2 on other hand sought to oppose writ petition. It was submitted impugned order was

¶28

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:13099 WP No. 103201 of 2023

¶29

issued on 30.06.2022 and more than two years thereafter petitioner was challenging it. It was also contended as no order was passed challenge was premature.

¶30

Heard learned counsel and perused writ petition

¶31

record.

¶32

From above, it is seen petitioner is challenging report submitted by Deputy Commissioner to Director of Municipal Administration for holding joint enquiry. Even according to petitioner, he has not yet been issued with Articles of Charge. Until now petitioner was issued with show-cause notice in preliminary enquiry to which he has submitted reply. Thereafter, Disciplinary Authorities are yet to take a decision whether to initiate departmental enquiry against petitioner or otherwise. As rightly pointed out by learned HCGP, it has been two years since submission of report. If no Enquiry appears to have been initiated and Articles of Charge issued to petitioner as yet.

¶33

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:13099 WP No. 103201 of 2023

¶34

In view of above, challenge against a mere report would not be tenable. Consequently, I do not find any good grounds to interfere.

¶35

Keeping open all contentions of petitioner in case departmental proceedings are initiated, writ petition is disposed of.

¶36

Sd/(RAVI V.HOSMANI) JUDGE

¶37

EM CT-ASC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21

Shri Parashuram S/O Kudleppa Gudadari v. the Director of Municipal Administration for State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Parashuram S/O Kudleppa Gudadari v. the Director of Municipal Administration for 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

Krishna S/O Timmanayak Dalawal Vs the State of Karnataka

Shri Siddarameshwar Education Trust, Vs the State of Karnataka

Shri.Taufeeq Abdulgafar Dharwad Vs Smt.Tabassum W/O Taufeeq Dharwad

Smt Manjula W/O Basavaraj Kattimani Vs the State of Karnataka

T Ravikumar S/O Late Eranna Vs the State of Karnataka

The Range Forest Officer Vs the Assistant Labour Commissioner