Murnad Education Society Vs M S Madhusudan

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 31/07/2023 IN W.P. NO.9330/2007 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE AND CONSEQUENTLY TO ALLOW WRIT

¶19

2 -

¶20

NC: 2026:KHC:8944-DB W.A. No.1319/2023

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

PETITION AS PRAYED FOR BY THE APPELLANT/PETITIONER AND TO GRANT SUCH OTHER SUITABLE RELIEFS & ETC.

¶23

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and

¶25

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL

¶26

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶27

(PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN)

¶28

We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as the learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

¶29

This appeal is preferred against the judgment dated 31.07.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.9330/2007 dismissing the writ petition filed by the Management as against an order passed by the Educational Appellate Tribunal at Annexure-H.

¶30

The learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the contentions raised by the appellant were not properly considered by the learned Single Judge. It is contended that the learned Single Judge had considered only one charge raised against the respondent herein and the fact that there were five

¶31

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:8944-DB W.A. No.1319/2023

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

charges against the respondent has been lost sight of, by the learned Single Judge. It is further submitted that the respondent is gainfully employed in another organization and that the direction to pay the backwages is not justified.

¶34

The learned counsel appearing for the respondent on the other hand contends that it was after a full and proper consideration of all the factual aspects of the matter, AnnexureH order was passed by the Educational Appellate Tribunal. It is contended that the entire proceedings against the respondent were found to be faulty and the order of dismissal was therefore, set aside.

¶35

It is submitted that since the order of termination of service was found to have been completely vitiated by improper conduct of enquiry, the only logical conclusion would be that the respondent would be entitled to re-instatement with backwages.

¶36

Having considered the contentions advanced on either side, we notice that the learned Single Judge has upheld Annexure-H order passed by the Educational Appellate Tribunal. We further notice that the Tribunal has considered the

¶37

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:8944-DB W.A. No.1319/2023

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

contentions advanced on both sides and has clearly come to a conclusion on the basis of the oral and documentary evidence placed on record that the alleged enquiry conducted by the Enquiry Officer was a complete sham and that no documents whatsoever had been produced by the Management at the enquiry.

¶40

It is the specific finding that the enquiry was conducted only from 10.00 a.m. to 01.30 p.m. on 05.07.2006 and no other proceedings had been conducted in the alleged enquiry. It is after considering the said factual aspects of the matter that the Educational Appellate Tribunal came to the specific conclusion that the enquiry was totally vitiated and that the termination order based on such a sham enquiry would have no legs to stand.

¶41

Having considered the contentions advanced on either side with reference to the documents and the material on record, we are unable to find any reason to disagree with the findings of the learned Single Judge in this Intra Court appeal. We notice that the factual aspects have been properly appreciated by the Appellate Tribunal in Annexure-H order.

¶42