Sri Ravi a N S/O Late a Nagendrappa Vs the… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

Sri Ravi a N S/O Late a Nagendrappa Vs the… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ of mandamus directing the respondents to dispose of the disciplinary proceedings pending before them in a time-bound manner, not later than 3 months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order, by following due process of law; prayer A (dropping of the disciplinary proceedings) was not pressed and was not granted.

Issue for consideration

Whether the disciplinary proceedings bearing No. 37:2017-18 dated 12.05.2017 initiated against the petitioner should be dropped as being contrary to the norms prescribed under the Corporation's own Circular No.1328 dated 04.04.2005 (prayer A; not pressed at arguments). +1 more

Ratio / Principle

Once the disciplinary process is initiated, it cannot be kept in abeyance for eternity; it is the duty and obligation of the disciplinary authority to conduct the proceedings in a time-bound manner, particularly where the employee seeks promotion and his promotion is kept in sealed cover.

Key takeaways

Since the articles of charge issued on 19.07.2024 were not followed by any enquiry or further action, a writ of mandamus was issued directing the respondents to dispose of the pending disciplinary proceedings in a time-bound manner, not later than 3 months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order, by following due process of law.ratio¶ORDER(ii)

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Service law - disciplinary proceedings - KSRTC employee on deputation - articles of charge issued on 19.07.2024 but no enquiry conducted thereafter - promotion kept in sealed cover - petitioner sought dropping of proceedings as contrary to Circular No.1328 dated 04.04.2005 (prayer A, not pressed) and time-bound disposal with release of sealed cover (prayer B). Held: once the disciplinary process is initiated it cannot be kept in abeyance for eternity; the disciplinary authority is duty-bound to complete the proceedings in a time-bound manner so that the employee is benefited if held not guilty, and for smooth functioning of the department. In an earlier round, W.P.No.104525 of 2024 challenging the articles of charge was disposed of requiring sealed cover procedure, the Coordinate Bench refraining from interference. Writ of mandamus issued to conclude the pending disciplinary proceedings within three months of receipt of a copy of the order, following due process of law. Petition partly allowed.

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Initiation of disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner by the respondent Corporation (proceedings bearing No. 37:2017-18 dated 12.05.2017, pursuant to articles of charge issued on 19.07.2024), which the petitioner prayed to have dropped as contrary to the Corporation's Circular No.1328 dated 04.04.2005.¶prayer
Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (respondent Corporation) · 12.05.2017
Prior proceeding
Petitioner appointed by respondent No.1-Corporation as Assistant Mechanical Engineer (Grade-II) at Davanagere Division.¶2
Prior proceeding
Petitioner put on deputation to Haveri District Skill Development Office as Assistant Director; on 14.10.2022 relieved from service with direction to report to duty at the deputed place.¶2
Prior proceeding
Show cause notice dated 04.05.2024 issued by the first respondent as to why disciplinary action should not be taken for not returning to the parental department after expiry of the deputation period.¶2
Prior proceeding
Petitioner replied to the show cause notice in detail requesting that no disciplinary action be initiated against him.¶2
Prior proceeding
On 06.07.2024 the petitioner submitted a representation to the second respondent to consider his case for promotion to Grade I Junior post.¶2
Prior proceeding
Respondent No.1 addressed a letter to the Deputy Chief Personnel Manager (Discipline), KSRTC, Bengaluru to initiate disciplinary action against the petitioner.¶3
Prior proceeding
Articles of charge issued to the petitioner on 19.07.2024; no enquiry or further action followed thereafter.¶3
Prior proceeding
Petitioner challenged the articles of charge in W.P.No.104525 of 2024, which was disposed of holding that issuance of articles of charge would be a ground for withholding promotion and respondents would be required to follow sealed cover procedure.¶3
Prior proceeding
The Coordinate Bench of this Court refrained from interference in the earlier writ petition W.P.No.104525 of 2024.¶3
Prior proceeding
During arguments in the present petition, counsel for the petitioner did not press prayer A (to drop the disciplinary proceedings) and confined the request to prayer B (time-bound disposal).¶9