Sri Nanarao Vs State of Karnataka

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT OF WOMEN CHILDREN DISABDLED AND SENIOR CITIZENS M S BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001.

¶14

Digitally signed by HEMALATHA A Location: HIGH COURTOF KARNATAKA

¶15

THE DIRECTOR DISABLED AND SENIOR CITIZENS WELFARE DEPARTMENT FIRST FLOOR, PODIUM BLOCK VISHWESHWRAIAH TOWER DR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGAURU-56001.

¶16

THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR WOMEN AND CHILDREN DEPARTMENT TUMKUR-572101.

¶17

THE DISTRICT DISABLED AND SENIOR CITIZENS WELFARE OFFICER

¶18

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:34877 WP No. 11357 of 2020

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

TUMKURU DISTRICT TUMKURU-572101.

¶21

TUMKURU TALUK PANCHAYATH TUMKURU

¶22

BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER-572101.

¶23

THE STATE COMMISSIONER FOR DISABLED IN KARNATAKA RISALDAR STREET SHESHADRIPURAM BENGALURU-560020

¶24

…RESPONDENTS

¶25

(BY SRI.B J ESWARAPPA, AGA FOR R1 TO R4 & R6)

¶26

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 25.09.2019 BEARING NO.JI AAM.KA.EE.TU/M.R.W.VA.JA.BA/2019-20/219 PASSED BY THE R-4 AND QUASH THE ORDER DATED: 21.03.2020 BEARING NO.JI.AAM.KA.EE.TU/HIMBARAHA/2019-20/363 PASSED BY THE 4^TH RESPONDENT AND ETC.

¶27

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶28

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

¶29

ORAL ORDER

¶30

In this writ petition, the petitioner has sought for the following relief/s:

¶31

“a) Quash the order dated 25.09.2019 bearing No.Ji.Aam, Ka.Ee.Tu/M.R.W.Va.Ja.Ba./2019 -20/219 passed by the 4^th Respondent.

¶32

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:34877 WP No. 11357 of 2020

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

b) Quash the Order dated 21.03.2020 bearing No.Ji.Aam.Ka.Ee.Tu./Himbaraha/2019-20/363

¶35

passed by the 4^th Respondent.

¶36

c) Pass any order of consequential relief or any other appropriate order or direction as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case in the ends of justice and equity.”

¶37

The case of the petitioner is that the State Government under the provisions of the Persons with Disability (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995, has issued the Government Order dated 16.08.2007 thereby constituting the posts of Rehabilitation Officers such as Village Rehabilitation Workers and Multipurpose Rehabilitation Workers. Pursuant to the said Government Order, the petitioner was appointed as a Multipurpose Rehabilitation Worker in the year 2013, as he had been diagnosed with 40% disability and belongs to a Scheduled Caste. When things stood thus, respondent No.4 issued the impugned order dated 25.09.2019 (Annexure-D), dismissing the petitioner from

¶38

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:34877 WP No. 11357 of 2020

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

service on the ground that a report from the Medical Board indicated that his extent of disability had been reduced to 30%. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted representations to the respondents enclosing Disability Certificate to show that he has 40% disability and requested that his representations be considered. Subsequently, respondent No.4 issued an endorsement dated 21.03.2020 (AnnexureH), stating that the petitioner cannot be considered in view of the fact that he has already crossed 54 years of age. In the objection filed by the State, it has also contended that the respondents were not satisfied with the petitioner’s work.

¶41

The specific case of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the impugned order dated 25.09.2019 at Annexure-D is passed without giving any notice to the petitioner. In fact, the same has not been communicated to the petitioner. It is further submitted that when serious allegations are made against the petitioner without giving any notice, the impugned orders have been passed

¶42

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:34877 WP No. 11357 of 2020

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

violating the principles of natural justice and the same is against the right guaranteed to the petitioner under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Hence, the petitioner has sought for allowing the writ petition.

¶45

Heard. Perused the writ petition papers.

¶46

It is not in dispute that the petitioner was appointed as a Multipurpose Rehabilitation Worker. Respondent No.4, by the impugned orders dated 25.09.2019 and 21.03.2020, dismissed the petitioner from the service. The said impugned orders were passed without giving any personal hearing to the petitioner. Therefore, it is a clear violation of the principles of natural justice and infringes upon the right guaranteed to the petitioner under Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

¶47

On this short ground of violation of the principles of natural justice, the writ petition is liable to be allowed. The impugned orders are required to be quashed. However, even though the impugned orders (Annexures-D and H)

¶48

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:34877 WP No. 11357 of 2020

¶49

HC-KAR

¶50

are liable to be set aside, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner cannot be reinstated into service till process is completed by the respondents. Hence, the following order is passed:

¶51

ORDER

¶52

a) The writ petition is allowed .

¶53

b) The impugned orders dated 25.09.2019 (AnnexureD) and 21.03.2020 (Annexure-H) are quashed.

¶54

c) The competent authority is directed to pass an

¶55

appropriate order after giving an opportunity to the petitioner, within three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶56

d) In case, the authority comes to the conclusion that