Allowed

Sri. S. Pratap Reddy v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC20 Nov 2024WP/17403/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court set aside an STA order discharging a police petitioner from service for failing a Kannada exam. Finding a similarly placed employee had being granted an exemption and noting the petitioner had passed the Kannada Kava exam with first class, the Court quashed the discharge orders and issued a writ of mandamus for reinstatement.

What did the court decide?

Writ of Certiorari quashing impugned Memoranda; Writ of Mandamus directing reinstate the petitioner in service; compliance report within six weeks; costs made easy.

Sri. S. Pratap Reddy Vs State of Karnataka — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:46990-DB WP No. 17403 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024 PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT

¶5

AND

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C M JOSHI WRIT PETITION NO. 17403 OF 2023 (S-KSAT)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI S. PRATAP REDDY, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, S/O. SONTI REDDY, STATE RPC NO. 441, 3^RD BATTALION, KSRP, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE-560 034. RESIDING IN POLICE QUARTERS, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE-560 034.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI M.R SHAILENDRA, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by NANDINI R Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶13

STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ITS SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560 001.

¶14

ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, KSRP, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001.

¶15

COMMANDANT 3^RD BATTALION, KSRP, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE-560 034.

¶16

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI KHAMROZ KHAN, AGA FOR R-1 TO R-3)

¶17

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:46990-DB WP No. 17403 of 2023

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A) CALL FOR RECORDS PERTAINING TO IMPUGNED ORDER IN APPLICATION No-2442/2020 OF THE KSAT AND ORDER ERRONEOUS CONCLUSION AT ANNEXURES-16; B) CALL FOR THE RECORDS PERTAINING TO 3^RD RESPONDENT ORDER AT ANNEXURES-R PERUSE THE SAME AND DECLARE THEM AS ILLEGAL ETC.

¶19

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

¶20

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT and

¶21

HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C M JOSHI ORAL ORDER

¶22

(PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT)

¶23

Petitioner, a member of the Reserved Police Froce, is grieving before the Writ Court against the State Administrative Tribunal's order dated 15.03.2023 whereby, his Application No.2442/2020 has been negatived. In the said Application, he had called in question two Memoranda dated 15.02.2020 & 03.07.2020 issued by the 3^rd respondent-Commandant, he was discharged from service on the ground that he had not passed the kannada departmental examination in question in time.

¶24

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:46990-DB WP No. 17403 of 2023

¶25

Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that the impugned order of the Tribunal is liable to be voided because:

¶26

(a) For a similar placed employee in all respects, the requirement of passing the examination has been dispensed with and therefore, petitioner cannot be discriminated against. (b) Even otherwise, he has already passed prescribed examination in Kannada language namely Kannada Kava conducted by Kannada Sahitya Parishad and therefore, petitioner could not have been discharged from service on the ground stated in the impugned Memoranda.

¶27

Learned AGA appearing for the respondents opposes the petition making submission in justification of the impugned order and the reasons on which the same has been structured. He submits that passing of the Kannada language examination as prescribed by Rule 5 of KCS (Service and Kannada Language Examinations) Rules, 1974 is a must; petitioner having not passed the same,

¶28

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:46990-DB WP No. 17403 of 2023

¶29

the respondent-Commandant had no discretion to disobey

¶30

the rule and thereby, retain him in service.

¶31

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and

¶32

having perused the Petition Papers, we are inclined to grant indulgence in the matter for the following reasons:

¶33

(a) By our order dated 23.10.2024, we had said as

¶34

under:

¶35

"Learned AGA to clarify as to whether the benefit given to another KSRP constable vide order dated 27.06.2024 is kept extended to the petitioner as well.

¶36

At the request of learned AGA, call this matter next week for 'further hearing'."

¶37

Learned AGA appearing for the respondents in all fairness

¶38

submits that petitioner's version that a similarly circumstanced employee namely Sri.B.Shekar, belonging to Special RPC 30 in the very same department, has been dispensed with the requirement of passing the subject examination vide Government Order dated 27.04.2024. The relevant portion of the same reads as under:

¶39

“¥Àæ¸ÁÛªÀ£ÉAiÀÄ°è «ªÀj¸À¯ÁVgÀÄªÀ CA±ÀUÀ¼À »£Éß¯ÉAiÀÄ°è, PÀ£ÁðlPÀ £ÁUÀjÃPÀ ¸ÉÃªÁ (¥ÀjÃ«PÀëuÉ) ¤AiÀÄªÀÄUÀ¼ÀÄ 1977gÀ ¤AiÀÄªÀÄ 4 (1)(ii) gÀ£ÀéAiÀÄ £ÉÃªÀÄPÁw ¥Áæ¢üPÁgÀªÀÅ FUÁUÀ¯ÉÃ ¥Àj«ÃPÀëuÁªÀ¢üAiÀÄ 11

¶40

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:46990-DB WP No. 17403 of 2023

¶41

wAUÀ¼À CªÀ¢üAiÀÄ£ÀÄß «¸ÀÛj¹ DzÉÃ²¹gÀÄªÀÅzÀjAzÀ ºÁUÀÆ ²æÃ ©.±ÉÃRgï, ¸Éà.Dgï.¦.¹-30 ¥ÀqÉ, PÉ.J¸ï.Dgï.¦, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ EªÀgÀÄ ¥ÉÆÃ°Ã¸ï PÁ£ïìmÉÃ§¯ï ºÀÄzÉÝUÉ £ÉÃªÀÄPÀw ºÉÆAzÀÄªÀ ¸ÀªÀÄAiÀÄzÀ°è J¸ï.J¸ï.J¯ï.¹ «zÁåºÀðvÉVAvÀ®Æ PÀrªÉÄ «zÁåºÀðvÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß CAzÀgÉ 4£ÉÃ vÀgÀUÀwAiÀÄ «zÁåºÀðvÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¤UÀ¢¥Àr¹gÀÄªÀÅzÀjAzÀ ¸ÀzÀjAiÀÄªÀjUÉ PÀ£ÁðlPÀ ¹«¯ï ¸ÉÃªÁ (¸ÉÃªÁ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ PÀ£ÀßqÀ¨sÁµÁ ¥ÀjÃPÉë) ¤AiÀÄªÀÄUÀ¼ÀÄ, 1974 ¤AiÀÄªÀÄ 5(1)(©) gÀ£ÀéAiÀÄ PÀ£ÀßqÀ ¨sÁµÁ ¥ÀjÃPÉëAiÀÄ vÉÃUÀðqÉ¬ÄAzÀ «£Á¬Äw ¤Ãr ¸ÀzÀjAiÀÄªÀgÀ ¥Àj«ÃPÀëuÁªÀ¢üAiÀÄ£ÀÄß WÉÆÃ¶¹zÉ.”

¶42

Learned counsel for the petitioner is right in telling that his client cannot be meted with a step-motherly treatment and that what applies to goose applies to gander.

¶43

(b) The above apart, petitioner has successfully passed Kannada Kava examination with first class and the said examination was conducted by none other than Kannada Sahitya Parishad, Bangalore vide Registration No.1347. To the said effect, a certificate dated 1.3.2024 has been issued by none other than the President of the Parishad. The said examination carried maximum of 200 marks and

¶44

minimum required for passing was 70. Petitioner has secured 140 marks which is evidenced by the marks card issued by the Parishad.

¶45

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:46990-DB WP No. 17403 of 2023

¶46

In the above circumstances, this petition succeeds; impugned order of the Tribunal is set at naught; petitioner's Application No.2442/2020 having been favoured, a Writ of Certiorari issues quashing the impugned Memoranda issued by the 3^rd respondentCommandant respectively at Annexures-A14 & A16 issued by respondent No.3 are quashed; a Writ of Mandamus issues to reinstate the petitioner in service, forthwith and report compliance to the Registrar General of this Court within six weeks, failing which, the said respondent runs the risk of contempt action.

¶47

Costs made easy.

¶48

Sd/(KRISHNA S DIXIT) JUDGE

¶49

Sd/(C M JOSHI) JUDGE

¶50

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23

¶51

NR/cbc

Sri. S. Pratap Reddy v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. S. Pratap Reddy v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri. Basavaraj Menashinakai, Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Ajay S Pathange Vs Sri B R Sathyanarayana Rao

Sri Srinath Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Shailaja K L Vs the State of Karnataka

The Regional Manager Vs R Kodandaram

National Institute of Mental Health Vs Smt S Anitha Joseph