Disposed¶65

Manjunatha Siddappa Vanakihal v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC10 Feb 2025WP/14731/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

BESCOM Assistant Linemen termination; W.A.261/2020 Division Bench judgment 09.11.2020 set aside terminations, ordered enquiry; enquiry report Sri H.M. Nanjudaswamy dated 29.04.2023; second show cause notice; Regulation 11(A) and 11(A)(2) of KEB Employees' Classification, Disciplinary, Control and Appeal Regulations 1987; prayer to implement enquiry report as-it-is contrary to Regulation 11(A); writ petitions premature; disposed of by common order; Article 226; Justice S.G. Pandit; 10.02.2025.

What did the court decide?

Since one of the prayers in the two writ petitions is common and based on common facts, both writ petitions were taken up together and disposed of by this common order. ¶51

Manjunatha Siddappa Vanakihal Vs State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Disposed

¶65

Issue for consideration

Whether respondents 3 and 6 (WP No.14731/2024) and respondents 2 and 3 (WP No.21299/2024) should be directed to implement the enquiry officer's report dated 29.04.2023 as it is, in light of the Division Bench judgment in W.A.No.261/2020 dated 09.11.2020. +2 more

¶56

Court's answer

The prayer to implement the enquiry report as it is is contrary to Regulation 11(A) of the Karnataka Electricity Board, Employees' Classification, Disciplinary, Control and Appeal Regulations 1987.

¶58

Ratio / Principle

Since one of the prayers in the two writ petitions is common and based on common facts, both writ petitions were taken up together and disposed of by this common order.

¶51

Key takeaways

Regulation 11(A) empowers the respondent/authorities to order further enquiry on recording reasons and to disagree with the enquiry officer's findings by recording its own finding on each article of charge where there is material evidence on record.ratio¶59
Whether the second show cause notice is in accordance with Regulation 11(A)(2) was not gone into at this stage.obiter¶60
It is for the petitioners to submit reply to the second show cause notice pointing out lacunae in the enquiry report or in the second show cause notice; thereafter, if any adverse order is passed, it is open for them to approach this Court or the appropriate authority.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru (S.G. Pandit, sole judge; 10.02.2025) - Common order disposing of two writ petitions (S-RES) filed under Article 226 by BESCOM Assistant Linemen (Manjunatha Siddappa Vanakihal; Basavaraj, Chandrashekar Siddappa Muthathi and Hanumantha Gowda Virupakshppa Vandala) whose earlier terminations had been set aside by the Division Bench in W.A.No.261/2020 (Annexure-D) dated 09.11.2020 with a direction to conduct enquiry and take appropriate action. Pursuant thereto, the enquiry officer's (Sri H.M. Nanjudaswamy) report dated 29.04.2023 was forwarded to the petitioners along with a second show cause notice, and the petitioners sought a direction to implement the enquiry report as it is. The judge held this prayer contrary to Regulation 11(A) of the Karnataka Electricity Board, Employees' Classification, Disciplinary, Control and Appeal Regulations 1987, which empowers the authorities to order further enquiry on recording reasons and to disagree with the enquiry officer's findings on each article of charge where material evidence exists; the respondent had exercised Regulation 11(A)(2). Whether the second show cause notice accorded with Regulation 11(A)(2) was expressly not gone into. Finding the petitions premature, the court disposed of both, advising the petitioners to reply to the second show cause notice pointing out lacunae and, if any adverse order follows, to approach the Court or the appropriate authority.

¶1

NC: 2025:KHC:5926 WP No. 14731 of 2024 C/W WP No. 21299 of 2024

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT WRIT PETITION NO. 14731 OF 2024 (S-RES)

¶7

C/W

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO. 21299 OF 2024 (S-RES)

¶9

IN WP No. 14731/2024

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

Digitally signed by KAVYA R Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶12

MANJUNATHA SIDDAPPA VANAKIHAL, S/O SIDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/AT ACHARYA LAYOUT, NEAR I.B. CIRCLE, HARAPANAHALLI, VIJAYANAGAR DISTRICT, WORKING IN BESCOM, SUB-DIVISION, BANGARPETE, DIVISION KGF, KOLAR DISTRICT

¶13

…PETITIONER

¶14

(BY SRI. RAVINDRANATH K., ADVOCATE)

¶15

AND:

¶16

STATE OF KARNATAKA ENERGY DEPARTMENT, VIKAS SOUDHA, DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD, BENGALURU 560 001.

¶17

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:5926 WP No. 14731 of 2024 C/W WP No. 21299 of 2024

¶18

REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.

¶19

STATE OF KARNATAKA SKILL DEVELOPMENT, ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND LIVELIHOOD DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU 560 001,

¶20

REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

¶21

THE MANAGING DIRECTOR BESCOM, K.R. CIRCLE, BENGALURU 560 001

¶22

THE COMMISSIONER EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING KOUSHALYA BHAVANA, BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BENGALURU 560 029.

¶23

THE JOINT DIRECTOR EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING, KOUSHALYA BHAVANA, BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BENGALURU 560 029

¶24

THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELE) BESCOM, K.G.F. DIVISION, CHAMPION RIPS, KGF 563 117

¶25

…RESPONDENTS

¶26

(BY SRI. V. SHIVAREDDY, AGA FOR R1, R2, R4 & R5; SMT. SWAMINI G MOHANAMBAL, ADVOCATE FOR R3 AND R6)

¶27

NC: 2025:KHC:5926 WP No. 14731 of 2024 C/W WP No. 21299 of 2024

¶28

¶29

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A) DIRECT THE R3 AND 6 TO IMPLEMENT THE REPORT OF THE ENQUIRY OFFICER OF SRI. H.M. NANJUDASWAMY DATED 29/04/2023 IMMEDIATELY CONSIDER THE ORDER PASSED BY DIVISION BENCH OF THIS HONBLE COURT IN WRIT APPEAL NO. 261/2020 ALONG WITH CONNECTED MATTERS DATED 09/11/2020 AS MENTIONED IN PARA NO. 21 OF THE SAID ORDER AND ETC.

¶30

IN WP NO. 21299/2024

¶31

BETWEEN:

¶32

SRI. BASAVARAJ SIDDAPPA MUTHATHI AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, PRESENTLY WORKING AS BESCOM MANGALAWADA BRANCH, MADHUGIRI SUB DIVISION.

¶33

SRI. CHANDRASHEKAR SIDDAPPA MUTHATHI S/O SIDDAPPA MUTHATHI, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, PRESENTLY WORKING AS BESCOM MANGALAWADA BRANCH MADHUGIRI SUB DIVISION, TUMKUR DISTRICT.

¶34

SRI. HANUMANTHA GOWDA VIRUPAKSHPPA VANDALA, S/O. VIRUPAKSHPPA VANDALA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, PRESENTLY WORKING AS BESCOM MADHUGIRI SUB DIVISION Y.N. HOSAKOTE SECTION,

¶35

- 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:5926 WP No. 14731 of 2024 C/W WP No. 21299 of 2024

¶36

TUMKUR DISTRICT

¶37

...PETITIONERS

¶38

(BY SRI. RAVINDRANATH K., ADVOCATE)

¶39

AND:

¶40

STATE OF KARNATAKA ENERGY DEPARTMENT VIKAS SOUDHA, DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD, BENGALURU 560 001, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

¶41

THE MANAGING DIRECTOR BESCOM, K.R. CIRCLE, BENGALURU 560 001.

¶42

THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELE) BESCOM, (C.O AND M) MADHUGIRI DIVISION MANGALAWADA SUB-DIVISION, MADHUGIRI SUB-DIVISION, TUMKUR DISTRICT.

¶43

...RESPONDENTS

¶44

(BY SRI. V. SHIVAREDDY, AGA FOR R1; SMT. SWAMINI G MOHANAMBAL, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3)

¶45

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A) DIRECT THE R2 AND 3 IMPLEMENT THE REPORT OF THE ENQUIRY OFFICER OF SRI. H.M. NANJUDASWAMY DATED 29/04/2023 TO THE PETITIONERS IMMEDIATELY AND ETC.

¶46

¶47

NC: 2025:KHC:5926 WP No. 14731 of 2024 C/W WP No. 21299 of 2024

¶48

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

¶49

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT

¶50

ORAL COMMON ORDER

¶51

Since one of the prayer in the above two writ petitions is common and based on common facts, both the writ petitions are taken up together and disposed of by this common order.

¶52

Heard learned counsel Sri Ravindranath K., appearing

¶53

for the petitioners, learned AGA Sri V. Shivareddy, for respondents 1, 2, 4 and 5 in W.P.No.14731/2024 and for respondent No.1 in W.P.No.21299/2024 and learned counsel Smt. Swamini G. Mohanambal, learned for respondents 3 and 6 in W.P.No.14731/2024 and for respondents 2 and 3 in W.P.No.21299/2024 respectively. Perused the writ petition papers.

¶54

The main prayer of the petitioners is for a direction to respondents 3 and 6 in WP No.14731/2024 and

¶55

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:5926 WP No. 14731 of 2024 C/W WP No. 21299 of 2024

¶56

respondents 2 and 3 in WP No.21299/2024 to implement the report of the enquiry officer dated 29.04.2023, in the light of the judgment of the Division Bench in W.A.No.261/2020 (Annexure-D) dated 09.11.2020.

¶57

The petitioners, who were appointed as Assistant Lineman were terminated from service. The said termination was the subject matter of W.A.No.261/2020 and other connected writ appeals. Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.261/2020 and other connected writ appeals, set aside the order of termination with a direction to respondents to conduct enquiry on the allegations and thereafter, to take appropriate action against the petitioners. In pursuance to the direction issued by the Division Bench, enquiry is conducted and enquiry report is forwarded to the petitioners along with second show case notice. The prayer of the petitioners is to implement the enquiry report as it is. The said prayer is contrary to Regulation 11(A) of the Karnataka Electricity Board, Employees' Classification, Disciplinary, Control and Appeal

¶58

7 - NC: 2025:KHC:5926 WP No. 14731 of 2024 C/W WP No. 21299 of 2024

¶59

Regulations 1987 (for Short 'the 1987 Regulations' ). Regulation 11(A) empowers the respondent/authorities to order for further enquiry on recording reasons and it also empowers to disagree with the findings of the enquiry officer by recording its finding on each article of charge, if there are material evidence on record.

¶60

In the instant case, the respondent exercised its power under Regulation 11(A)(2) of 1987 Regulations. Whether second show cause notice is in accordance with Regulation 11(A)(2) or not, is not gone into at this stage. It is for the petitioners to submit reply to the second show cause notice pointing out lacunae in the enquiry report or lacunae in the second show cause notice. Thereafter, if any adverse order is passed, it is open for the petitioners to approach this Court or appropriate authority.

¶61

Present writ petitions are premature one. It is open for the petitioners to submit reply to the second show cause notice within the time specified therein.

¶62

NC: 2025:KHC:5926 WP No. 14731 of 2024 C/W WP No. 21299 of 2024

¶63

¶64

With the above observation both the writ petitions

¶65

stand disposed of.

¶66

Sd/(S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE

¶67

NG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 0 CT:SNN