Allowed

Sri. Ullas H. v. the Chief General Manager

Karnataka HC6 Aug 2024WP/7630/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A bank manager demoted by disciplinary proceedings challenged the penalty and sought a mandamus to dispose of his pending appeal. The court partly allowed the petition, directing the appellate authority to decide the appeal within one month.

What did the court decide?

Writ allowed in part; respondent No.2 directed to dispose of the appeal within one month from receipt of copy of order; I.A.No.1/2024 disposed.

Sri. Ullas H. Vs the Chief General Manager — Service and Employment | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:31363 WP No. 7630 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 7630 OF 2024 (S-RES)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SRI. ULLAS H. S/O HANUMANTHAPPA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS MANAGER, ASSET RECOVERY BRANCH UNION BANK OF INDIA BENGALURU SOUTH REGION BENGALURU ZONE BENGALURU-560002 EMP. NO.673396

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. HANUMANTHAPPA HARAVIGOWDAR, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER UNION BANK OF INDIA HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT CENTRAL OFFICE NO.239, VIDHANA BHAVAN MARG NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI-400021, MAHARASHTRA STATE.

¶13

THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER APPELLATE AUTHORITY UNION BANK OF INDIA HUMAN RESOURCES VERTICAL CENTRAL OFFICE NO.239, VIDHANA BHAVAN MARG NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI-400021, MAHARASHTRA STATE.

¶14

DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY BY CHIEF MANAGER

¶15

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:31363 WP No. 7630 of 2024

¶16

EMPLOYEES RELATIONS DIVISION CENTRAL OFFICE UNION BANK OF INDIA HUMAN RESOURCES VERTICAL CENTRAL OFFICE NO.239, VIDHANA BHAVAN MARG, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI-400021, MAHARASHTRA STATE.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI. PRADEEP S. SAWKAR, ADVOCATE)

¶19

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE 3^RD RESPONDENT DATED 24.01.2024 VIDE ANNEXURE-A BEARING NO.CO:ERD:0487:2024 AND ETC.

¶20

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

¶21

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ

¶22

ORAL ORDER

¶23

The petitioner has sought for the following reliefs:

¶24

"(i) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing of the impugned order passed by the 3^rd respondent dated 24.01.2024 vide Annexure-A bearing No.CO:ERD:0487:2024;

¶25

(ii) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the 2^nd respondent shall dispose of the pending appeal of the petitioner within a period of 1½ months vide Annexure-B dated 25.02.2024."

¶26

¶27

NC: 2024:KHC:31363 WP No. 7630 of 2024

¶28

The respondent No.3 initiated disciplinary

¶29

proceedings against the petitioner which culminated in an order imposing major penalty of demotion of the petitioner. This order was challenged before the Appellate Authority and it is contended that the Appellate Authority has not disposed off the appeal. Therefore, it is contended that the petitioner is deprived of serving in the post, in which, he was appointed, due to the punishment imposed by the disciplinary Authority. It is further contended that the Appellate Authority is deliberately sitting over the appeal and not considering it and hence has filed this writ petition.

¶30

The learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the above and sought for suitable directions.

¶31

The learned counsel for the respondents submits that the appeal filed by the petitioner will be considered and disposed off expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶32

In view of the aforesaid submission, this writ petition is allowed in part and the respondent No.2 is directed to dispose off the appeal filed by the petitioner

¶33

¶34

NC: 2024:KHC:31363 WP No. 7630 of 2024

¶35

challenging the order of the disciplinary Authority dated 24.01.2024 within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶36

In view of disposal of main appeal, I.A.No.1/2024

¶37

does not survive for consideration and the same stands disposed off.

¶38

Sd/(R. NATARAJ) JUDGE

¶39

¶40

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27

Sri. Ullas H. v. the Chief General Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Ullas H. v. the Chief General Manager

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

Smt S H Vanajakshi Vs the Deputy Director

Shruthi K S Vs State of Karnataka

Dr K Srinivasa Vs the State of Karnataka

Sathish Kumar S T Vs Union of India

Sri. H.M. Srikantaiah Vs the Karnataka Power Transmission

D.C Lokesh Vs Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Ltd.