Disposed

Shantveer S. Parushetti v. the Deputy Director of Administration

Karnataka HC12 Jun 2024WP/145671/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A private school management challenged an appellate order reducing punishment imposed on its in-charge Headmaster for forwarding an increment proposal including his own name. The High Court upheld the modification to a warning as proportionate, and directed implementation of the appellate order and release of withheld increments and salary difference.

What the court decided

AI extract

Shantveer S. Parushetti Vs the Deputy… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC-D:7846 WP No. 145671 of 2020 C/W WP No. 112055 of 2019

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO.145671/2020(S-RES) C/W

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO.112055/2019

¶9

IN WP.NO.145671/2020:

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

SHANTVEER S. PARUSHETTI, AGE:56 YEARS, OCC: ASSISTANT TEACHER IN SHREE BALABHIM VIDYA PRASARAK SAMITI, KELAKAR HIGH SCHOOL, KULGOD, TQ: GOKAK, CHIKKODI EDUCATION DISTRICT.

¶12

…PETITIONER

¶13

Digitally signed by V N BADIGER Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶14

(BY SRI RAMACHANDRA V. BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR SRI NANDISH PATIL, ADVOCATE)

¶15

AND:

¶16

THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, CHIKKODI EDUCATION DISTRICT.

¶17

THE BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER, MUDALAGI RANGE (REGION), MUDALAGI, TQ: GOKAK, CHIKKODI EDUCATION DISTRICT.

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SRI P.N.HATTI, HCGP)

¶20

2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:7846 WP No. 145671 of 2020 C/W WP No. 112055 of 2019

¶21

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NOS.1 AND 2 TO IMPLEMENT THE ORDER DATED 10.06.2019 BRG.NO.CPI 72/2018-19/ 759 PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER

¶22

VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND TO GRANT THREE INCREMENTS WHICH HAS BEEN WRONGLY WITHHELD AND TO PAY THE DIFFERENCE OF SALARY AND ETC.

¶23

IN WP.NO.112055/2019:

¶24

BETWEEN:

¶25

SHREE BALABHIM VIDYA PRASARAK SAMITI KULGOD BY ITS CHAIRMAN, SMT. SWATI W/O. SADANAND PANDIT, AGE: 56 YEARS, R/O: CAMP: KUSUM KUNJ, KELKAR BUILDNG, GANDHI CHOWK, DHARWAD – 01.

¶26

…PETITIONER

¶27

(BY SRI PRASHANT S. KADADEVAR, ADVOCATE)

¶28

AND:

¶29

THE COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, RODDA ROAD, DHARWAD.

¶30

DEPUTY DIRECTOR (ADMINISTRATION), DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, CHIKKODI, CHIKKODI EDUCATIONAL DISTRICT.

¶31

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:7846 WP No. 145671 of 2020 C/W WP No. 112055 of 2019

¶32

BLOCK EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, MUDALAGI RANGE (REGION), MUDALAGI, TQ: GOKAK, CHIKKODI EDUCATIONAL DISTRICT.

¶33

SHANTAVEER PARUSHETTI AGE: 56 YEARS, OCC: AT PRESENT WORKING AS ASSISTANT TEACHER, IN SHREE BALABHIM VIDYA PRASARAK SAMITI KELAKAR HIGH SCHOOL, KULGOD, TQ: GOKAK, CHIKKODI EDUCATIONAL DISTRICT.

¶34

…RESPONDENTS

¶35

(BY SRI P.N.HATTI, HCGP FOR R1 TO R3; SRI RAMACHANDRA V. BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR SRI NANDISH PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R4)

¶36

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 10.06.2019 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 IN APPEAL BEARING NO.CPI/72/2018-19/759 PRODUCED HEREWITH AS ANNEXURE-C TO THE EXTENT OF MODIFYING THE PUNISHMENT AND ETC.,

¶37

THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING - B GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶38

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:7846 WP No. 145671 of 2020 C/W WP No. 112055 of 2019

¶39

ORDER

¶40

W.P.No.112055/2019 is filed by the petitionermanagement aggrieved by the order dated 10.06.2019 passed by the Respondent No.1 in Appeal No.CPI 72/2018-19/759 produced at Annexure-C by which the Appellate Authority while allowing the appeal filed by the Respondent No.4, had set aside as order passed by the petitioner-management imposing penalty in the nature of reduction of two increments and imposition of fine of Rs.75,000/-, and modified the same directing to issue a warning to Respondent No.4.

¶41

The facts leading up to the filing of the present petition is that;

¶42

The Respondent No.4 was an employee of the petitioner-Education Institution working as Assistant Teacher and was holding the post of in-charge Headmaster between 30-10-2008 to 08.02.2018. That while he was discharging his duty as in-charge Headmaster during the said period, he had committed certain misconduct as a result of which the petitioner-Institution had appointed an

¶43

5 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:7846 WP No. 145671 of 2020 C/W WP No. 112055 of 2019

¶44

Enquiry Officer who after issuing show cause notice along with imputation of charges had conducted the enquiry. The enquiry was conducted by the retired District Judge in terms of provisions of Rule 21 of the Karnataka Education Institution (Recruitment and Terms and Conditions of Service of Employees in Private Aided Primary and Secondary Educational Institutions) Rules, 1999.

¶45

That the Respondent No.4 had participated in the said departmental enquiry. Four charges were framed against the Respondent No.4 of which only one charge was proved while the other three charges were not proved.

¶46

The case of the petitioner is that charge No.1 which was imputed against the Respondent No.4 was that while discharging his service as in-charge Headmaster of petitioner-institution, Respondent No.4 had forwarded a proposal seeking increment in the pay scale in respect of employees who had completed 25-30 years of service. While forwarding such proposal, the petitioner apparently had included his name and had also stated that the said

¶47

6 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:7846 WP No. 145671 of 2020 C/W WP No. 112055 of 2019

¶48

proposal was backed by the resolution passed by the committee.

¶49

Thus, after conducting the inquiry, the Enquiry Officer has found the said charge was proved against the petitioner. Based on the report the petitioner-Managing Committee imposed punishment in the nature of withholding three increments and imposing fine of Rs.75,000/- of penalty as fine. Aggrieved by the same respondent No.4 preferred appeal before the Appellate Tribunal in Appeal No.CPI 75/2018-19/759 under Section 30 of the Karnataka Education Act, 1983. The Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeal modified the penalty imposed on Respondent No.4.

¶50

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite the Appellate Authority having found that the charge No.1 was proved against the Respondent No.4, ought not to have interfered with the same reducing the said penalty. He submits that the act of the Respondent No.4 is grave in nature of he misusing his position and the Appellate Authority ought not to have reverse the same.

¶51

7 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:7846 WP No. 145671 of 2020 C/W WP No. 112055 of 2019

¶52

Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent No.4 vehemently submits that the Respondent No.4 had not misused his position as alleged by the petitioner. He further submits that it is the case of the Respondent No.4 that he had forwarded the proposal based on the oral instruction issued by the management committee. He further submits that since the proposal was forwarded on the oral instructions of the managing committee, no resolution was enclosed. He submits that the imposition of penalty by Enquiry Officer was thus not only disproportionate to the allegations being made, but also unreasonable which has been rightly appreciated and taken note of by the Appellate Authority while allowing the appeal and reversing the punishment imposed.

¶53

Heard and perused the records.

¶54

Though the Appellate Authority have found that charge No.1 was proved against the Respondent No.4, it however opined that the punishment of withholding three increments and imposing of Rs.75,000/fine was disproportionate. Thus, modified the said order in appeal

¶55

8 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:7846 WP No. 145671 of 2020 C/W WP No. 112055 of 2019

¶56

by directing the management to issue warning to the Respondent No.4, instead.

¶57

On query by this Court, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner has retired from his service on 31.01.2024.

¶58

On perusal of the record further indicate that the Respondent No.4 has apparently forwarded the proposal for enhancement of pay scale in respect of the employees who had completed service of 25-30 years in which he had allegedly included his name. It may be that the said proposal was forwarded without resolution by the management and the Respondent No.4 ought to have been continues about making such representation to the authorities. However looking into the facts and circumstances of the matter wherein the proposal sent by him was not just for himself, but for all those employees of Institution who had completed service of 25-30 years, cannot be said that he had manipulated the record or taken undue advantage of his position as in-charge Headmaster. Further no material evidence is placed on

¶59

9 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:7846 WP No. 145671 of 2020 C/W WP No. 112055 of 2019

¶60

record with regard to any fabrication of documents or records except a statement of he having been instructed orally by the managing committee. No doubt such proposal being on record has been proved. However the same does not warrant imposition of severe punishment of withholding three increments and imposing Rs.75,000/penalty. The Appellate Authority has come to just conclusion of the matter.

¶61

In that view of the matter, no grounds are made out warranting interference with order passed by the Appellate Authority. Petition in W.P.No.112055/2019 lacks merit accordingly, it is dismissed.

¶62

W.P. No.145671/2020 is filed by the petitioner (Respondent No.4 in W.P.No.112055/2019) seeking direction for implementation of the order of the Appellate Authority and for direction to the respondent Nos.1 and 2 therein to release his pensionary benefits, retirement compensatory benefits. Necessary to note that upon the representation made by the petitioner, a communication dated 06.01.2020 has already been issued by Respondent

¶63

10 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:7846 WP No. 145671 of 2020 C/W WP No. 112055 of 2019

¶64

No.1 to Respondent No.2 to implement the order dated 10.06.2019. In that view of the matter, the Respondent Nos.1 and 2 shall take necessary steps in

¶65

releasing/granting three increments withheld and pay the difference of salary within an outer limit of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order. Accordingly, W.P.No.145671/2020 is disposed off.

¶66

In view of the disposed off the petitions, pending applications, if any, does not survive for consideration.

¶67

SD/JUDGE

¶68

SMM/CT-ASC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15

Shantveer S. Parushetti v. the Deputy Director of Administration

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Shantveer S. Parushetti v. the Deputy Director of Administration

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Venkataraman S/O. Gutya Harijan Vs State of Karnataka

Sri.Bhimappa S/O Adiveppa Vs the Union of India

Sri. S.D.H. Patil S/O Devappa Vs the Karnataka Power

Smt.Nirmala W/O Sidrai Chinnannavar Vs the Nwkrtc Belagavi Division

Smt. Shanta Alias Shantavva W/O Lasxman Kamati Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri.Sharanabasappa S/O. Neelappa Madiwalar Vs the General Manager