The Karnataka Lokayukta Vs Government of Karnataka

GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, REPTD. BY ITS ADDL SECRETARY. THE DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT(BBMP), VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶15

THE COMMISSIONER, BBMP BENGALURU, HUDSON CIRCLE, BBMP HEAD OFFICE, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶16

SRI. VENKATACHALAPATHY, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, PRESENTLY WORKING AS JOINT

¶17

2 -

¶18

NC: 2026:KHC:14782-DB WA No. 1600 of 2024

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

COMMISSIONER (REVENUE), HUDSON CIRCLE, BBMP HEAD OFFICE, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SRI. MOHAMMED JAFFAR SHAH, AGA FOR R1)

¶23

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, READ WITH ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE ORDER DATED:06.11.2023 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WP NO.1221/2020 AS PER ANNEXURE-U.

¶24

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

¶25

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH

¶26

and

¶27

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF

¶28

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶29

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH)

¶30

The present intra Court appeal has been filed impugning the order dated 06.11.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.1221/2020, filed by the Karnataka Lokayukta.

¶31

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:14782-DB WA No. 1600 of 2024

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

A complaint came to be lodged by one

¶34

Sri.Subbu Hegde, against the Joint Director of Town Planning, BBMP, alleging that Sri Nakoda Constructions Limited had obtained sanction plan based on false documents of public lands and civil amenity areas. The said complaint was closed as the Lokayukta did not find any merit in the complaint. Despite the closing of the complaint, a report under Section 12(3) of the Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984 came to be submitted against respondent No.3, who was the petitioner before the Writ Court.

¶35

Thereafter, the enquiry was entrusted to the Lokayukta and the Lokayukta conducted the departmental enquiry. The Enquiry Officer held the charges proved and submitted a report. The learned Single judge in the impugned order has opined that once the complaint on the basis of which the departmental proceedings were instituted itself got closed as the Lokayukta found the complaint without any merit, there was no occasion for the

¶36

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:14782-DB WA No. 1600 of 2024

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

Lokayukta to proceed further with the enquiry under Section 12(3) the Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984 and submit a report and consequently whole department should be punished. We find the view taken by the Learned Single Judge is justified in the facts and circumstances of the case and therefore we do not find any merit in the case and the writ appeal is accordingly,

¶39

dismissed .

¶40

In view of the dismissal of the appeal, pending I.A., if

¶41

any, does not survive for consideration and the same is disposed of.

¶42

Sd/(D K SINGH) JUDGE

¶43

Sd/(T.M.NADAF) JUDGE

¶44

PK