Karnataka State Agro Corn Products Limited Vs Sri v R Somwanshi — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Karnataka State Agro Corn Products Limited Vs Sri v R Somwanshi — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

All four writ appeals allowed; the Single Judge's judgment and order dated 02.08.2024 set aside. Employees held entitled to earned leave under Rule 4.17(8)(Note:1(ii)), gratuity with statutory interest (interest on gratuity from 25.01.2006) and leave encashment for 240 days, payable within six weeks. The Corporation is barred from re-initiating disciplinary proceedings against the appellant in WA No. 832/2025, but its right to recover the amount in appropriate civil proceedings is protected. No order as to costs.

Issue for consideration

Scope of reconsideration after remand: whether the learned Single Judge could re-open the merits of the enquiry and punishment when the earlier remand had confined reconsideration to whether the punishment accorded with the Service Rules (Rule 8.3). +3 more

Court's answer

Once the merits had been considered in the earlier round and all contentions of the petitioners rejected except the limited remand on whether the punishment accorded with the Service Rules, the learned Single Judge ought not to have gone into the merits afresh.

Ratio / Principle

The disciplinary enquiry was held in accordance with law and the petitioners were given full opportunity to defend their cases.

Key takeaways

The charges against the petitioners stood proved.ratio¶90
The impugned judgment and order of the learned Single Judge is unsustainable.ratio¶89
The impugned judgment and order of the learned Single Judge is set aside and the writ appeals are allowed.ratio¶90

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Division Bench (D K Singh and T.M. Nadaf, JJ.; judgment per D K Singh, J.) allowed the employer-Karnataka State Agro Corn Products Limited's writ appeals (WA Nos. 1690, 1694 and 1738 of 2024) and the employee's WA No. 832 of 2025 against the Single Judge's judgment dated 02.08.2024 in W.P.Nos.50964/2012, 35645/2012 and 35646/2012, which had set aside the Disciplinary Authority's order dated 25.01.2006 (termination) and the Appellate Authority's order dated 21.11.2011 (dismissal substituted on remand) and directed consequential benefits. Holding that the earlier remand had confined reconsideration to whether the punishment comported with Rule 8.3 of the Karnataka Agro Industries Corporation Service Rules, 1969, the Court held the Single Judge erred in re-appreciating the merits; the enquiry was lawful, with full opportunity of defence and no infraction of natural justice, and the charges stood proved. The impugned judgment was set aside, yet the employees were held entitled to earned leave under Rule 4.17(8)(Note:1(ii)), gratuity with statutory interest (interest from 25.01.2006) and leave encashment for 240 days, payable within six weeks. Fresh disciplinary proceedings against the WA No. 832/2025 appellant were barred, with the Corporation's right of recovery in appropriate civil proceedings protected. No costs.

NC: 2026:KHC:29373-DB WA No. 1690 of 2024 C/W WA No. 1694 of 2024 WA No. 1738 of 2024 AND 1 OTHER

1 -

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH

AND

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF

WRIT APPEAL NO.1690 OF 2024 (S-RES) C/W WRIT APPEAL NO.1694 OF 2024 (S-DE) WRIT APPEAL NO.1738 OF 2024 (S-DE) WRIT APPEAL NO.832 OF 2025 (S-RES)

IN WA No.1690/2024:

BETWEEN:

KARNATAKA STATE AGRO CORN PRODUCTS LIMITED., GOVT OF KARNATAKA UNDERTAKING REGD OFFICE: POST BAG NO.2479 BELLARY ROAD, HEBBAL, BENGALURU - 560 024. REP BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR

…APPELLANT

Digitally signed by REKHA R Location: High Court of Karnataka

(BY SRI. MURALIDHAR H M., ADVOCATE)

AND:

SRI. V.R. SOMWANSHI, S/O RAMRAO, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, R/AT NO. 249, "INDIRA NIVAS", NEAR BASAVA TEMPLE, BASEHTTIHALLI INDUSTRIAL AREA DODDA BALLAPRUA - 561203 BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.

…RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. PRAMOD N. KATHAVI, SR. ADVOCATE FOR SRI. S.V. BHAT., ADVOCATE FOR C/R)

2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:29373-DB WA No. 1690 of 2024 C/W WA No. 1694 of 2024 WA No. 1738 of 2024 AND 1 OTHER

HC-KAR

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS, PERUSE THE SAME, ALLOW THIS WRIT APPEAL SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE PASSED IN WP NO.50964/2012 DATED:02.08.2024 AND ETC.,

IN WA NO. 1694/2024:

BETWEEN:

KARNATAKA STATE AGRO CORN PRODUCTS LIMITED., GOVT OF KARNATAKA UNDERTAKING REGD OFFICE: POST BAG NO.2479 BELLARY ROAD, HEBBAL, BENGALURU - 560 024. REP BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR

...APPELLANT

(BY SRI. MURALIDHAR H M., ADVOCATE)

AND:

SRI. T.R. SRINATH, S/O LATE T.N. RAMAMURTHY, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, EARLIER WORKIGN AS DY. GEN MANAGER KARNATAKA STATE AGRO CORN PRODUCTS LTD, DODDABALLAPUR UNIT SINCE ILLEGALLY DISMISSED FROM SERVICE AND R/AT NO. 25/1, 13^TH CROSS, 11^TH MAIN, WILSON GARDEN, BENGALURU - 560 024.

...RESPONDENT

(BY SRI.PRAMOD N. KATHAVI, SR. ADVOCATE FOR SRI. S.V. BHAT., ADVOCATE FOR C/R)

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:29373-DB WA No. 1690 of 2024 C/W WA No. 1694 of 2024 WA No. 1738 of 2024 HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS, PERUSE THE SAME, ALLOW THIS WRIT APPEAL SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE PASSED IN WP NO.35645/2012 DATED:02.08.2024 AND ETC.,

IN WA NO. 1738/2024:

BETWEEN:

KARNATAKA STATE AGRO CORN PRODUCTS LIMITED., GOVT OF KARNATAKA UNDERTAKING REGD OFFICE: POST BAG NO.2479 BELLARY ROAD, HEBBAL, BENGALURU - 560 024. REP BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR

...APPELLANT

(BY SRI. MURALIDHAR H M.,ADVOCATE)

AND:

SRI. R. RAMESH RAO, S/O S. RAMADAS, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, EARLIER WORKING AS DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER, KARNATAKA STATE AGRO CORN PRODUCTS LTD., MYSORE UNIT, SINCE ILLEGALLY DISMISSED FROM SERVICE AND RESIDING AT FLAT NO.01 VISHAL APRTMENTS, NO.21, MODEL HOUSE STREET, BASAVANAGUDI, BENGALURU - 560 004.

...RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. GIRISH, ADVOCATE FOR C/RESPONDENT)

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:29373-DB WA No. 1690 of 2024 C/W WA No. 1694 of 2024 WA No. 1738 of 2024 AND 1 OTHER

HC-KAR

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT,1961, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS, PERUSE THE SAME, ALLOW THIS WRIT APPEAL SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE PASSED IN WP No.35646/2012 DATED:02.08.2024 AND ETC.,

IN WA NO. 832/2025:

BETWEEN:

SRI. V.R. SOMWANSHI, S/O RAMRAO, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.249, "INDIRA NIVAS", NEAR BASAVA TEMPLE, BASHETTIHALLI INDUSTRIAL AREA, DODDABALLAPUR - 561 203. BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT.

...APPELLANT

(BY SRI. PRAMOD N. KATHAVI, SR. ADVOCATE FOR SRI. S.V. BHAT., ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE MANAGEMENT OF KARNATAKA STATE AGRO CORN PRODUCTS LTD., A GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA UNDERTAKING POST BOX NO. 2479, BELLARY ROAD, HEBBAL, BANGALORE - 560 024.

THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KARNATAKA STATE AGRO CORN PRODUCTS LTD., A GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA UNDERTAKING POST BOX NO. 2479, BELLARY ROAD, HEBBAL, BANGALORE - 560 024.

NC: 2026:KHC:29373-DB WA No. 1690 of 2024 C/W WA No. 1694 of 2024 WA No. 1738 of 2024 AND 1 OTHER

5 -

HC-KAR

THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY, KARNATAKA STATE AGRO CORN PRODUCTS LTD., A GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA UNDERTAKING POST BOX NO. 2479, BELLARY ROAD, HEBBAL, BANGALORE - 560 024. BY ITS MEMBER

...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. MURALIDHAR H M., ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3)

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO MODIFY THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE DATED:02.08.2024 IN SO FAR AS REFUSING TO QUASH THE ORDERS DATED:20.03.2007 AND 02.07.2007 (ANNEXURE-AD AND AF) TO THE WRIT PETITION AND GRANT THE RELIEFS (ii) & (iii) IN THE PRAYER COLUMN OF WRIT PETITION NO.50964/2012.

THESE APPEALS ARE COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF

ORAL JUDGMENT

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

These appeals have been filed impugning the

judgment and order dated 02.08.2024 passed by the Writ

Court in W.P.Nos.50964/2012 & connected matters.

The parties are referred to as per their rankings before the Writ Court for the sake of convenience.

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:29373-DB WA No. 1690 of 2024 C/W WA No. 1694 of 2024 WA No. 1738 of 2024 AND 1 OTHER

HC-KAR

The petitioners, ex-employees of M/s.Karnataka

State Agro Corn Corporation Products Limited have filed three writ petitions challenging the punishment orders dated 25.01.2006 passed by the Disciplinary Authority and order dated 21.11.2011 passed by the Appellate Authority imposing punishment of termination from service. Earlier to filing of these writ petitions, the petitioners had challenged the order of punishment inflicted upon them.

The petitioners had filed W.P.Nos.17095/2007 c/w 17092/2007 challenging the order of punishment passed by the Disciplinary Authority imposing the penalty of termination from service and the order of Appellate Authority confirming the order passed by the Disciplinary Authority. The petitioners raised objection that Rule 8.3 of the Karnataka Agro Industries Corporation Service Rules, 1969, provides for penalties. The petitioners were not appointed on contract basis, as such the question of terminating them would not arise. The termination from

7 - NC: 2026:KHC:29373-DB WA No. 1690 of 2024 C/W WA No. 1694 of 2024 WA No. 1738 of 2024 HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER

service can only be with respect to the employees who were appointed on contract basis. Either of the petitioners was not appointed on contract basis, the punishment order of terminating their services would be against the Service Rule 8.3.

The learned Single Judge held that the findings recorded by the Enquiry Officer as well as acceptance of the report by the Disciplinary Authority could not be faulted with. However, it was said that when a specific ground was raised in the memorandum of appeal against inflicting the punishment of termination from service, the Appellate Authority was required to consider the said ground and pass appropriate orders. The Appellate Authority did not deal with the specific ground raised, therefore the matter was remanded back to the Appellate Authority for fresh consideration having regard to the specific ground urged by the petitioners in the memorandum of appeal.

8 - NC: 2026:KHC:29373-DB WA No. 1690 of 2024 C/W WA No. 1694 of 2024 WA No. 1738 of 2024 HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER

The observation that matter stands remitted to

the Appellate Authority and the Appellate Authority shall take into consideration the grounds of appeal and pass appropriate orders, would not mean that the petitioners got the liberty to impugn the order of the Disciplinary Authority so for as merit was concerned, but they were given liberty only to urge all grounds in support of their contention that Rule 8.3 did not provide for imposing the punishment of termination of service on permanent employees.

On remand, the Appellate Authority converted the punishment of termination from service to dismissal from service. The order passed by the Appellate Authority inflicting the punishment order of dismissal from service came to be challenged by the petitioners by filing the three writ petitions as noted above. The learned Single Judge in the impugned judgment and order has set aside the order passed by the Disciplinary Authority dated 25.01.2006 and the Appellate Authority order dated

9 - NC: 2026:KHC:29373-DB WA No. 1690 of 2024 C/W WA No. 1694 of 2024 WA No. 1738 of 2024 HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER

21.11.2011 and directed for payment of all consequential

benefits to the petitioners.

The learned Single Judge, in fact, has again gone into the merit of the enquiry and punishment inflicted. In view of the earlier order passed, as noted above in the writ petitions, the only question which was to be considered by the Appellate Authority was that, whether the order of punishment inflicting the punishment of termination from service was in accordance with law or

some other punishment was required to be inflicted. The learned Single Judge has considered the merit of the case instead of considering the fact that whether the punishment order of dismissal from service was provided under Rule 8.3 or not.

We are of the considered view that, the learned Single Judge ought not to have gone into the merit again once the merit was considered in earlier round and all contentions of the petitioners were rejected except for

10 - NC: 2026:KHC:29373-DB WA No. 1690 of 2024 C/W WA No. 1694 of 2024 WA No. 1738 of 2024 HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER

remanding the matter back to the Appellate Authority to consider whether the order of punishment of termination from service was in accordance with the Service Rules or not.

We are therefore of the view that, the impugned judgment and order of passed by the learned Single Judge is unsustainable. The enquiry was held in accordance with the law. The petitioners were given full opportunity to defend their cases. There was no infraction

of the procedure or principal of natural justice in conducting the enquiry. Charges stood proved. We, therefore, set aside the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge and allow these writ appeals.

The petitioners are however entitled to payment

of Earned Leave in terms of Rule 4.17(8)(Note:1(ii)). The petitioners shall be paid the Gratuity along with statutory interest as well as the Leave Encashment for 240 days. The interest should be paid on gratuity w.e.f. 25.01.2006.

11 - NC: 2026:KHC:29373-DB WA No. 1690 of 2024 C/W WA No. 1694 of 2024 WA No. 1738 of 2024 HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER

With the aforesaid direction for payment of Gratuity along with statutory interest and Leave Encashment for 240 days, within a period of six weeks, the writ appeals stand

allowed .

We make it clear that, the appellant-

Corporation would not be entitled to reinitiate any disciplinary proceedings against the appellant in W.A.No.832/2025. However, the right of the appellantCorporation to recover the amount in appropriate civil proceedings is protected. No order as to costs.

Sd/(D K SINGH) JUDGE

Sd/(T.M.NADAF) JUDGE

DR

List No.: 2 Sl No.: 9 ct-vn

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Judgment and order dated 02.08.2024 of the learned Single Judge (Writ Court) in W.P.Nos.50964/2012, 35645/2012 and 35646/2012, whereby the Disciplinary Authority's order dated 25.01.2006 and the Appellate Authority's order dated 21.11.2011 were set aside and payment of all consequential benefits was directed; insofar as WA No. 832 of 2025, the Single Judge refused to quash the orders dated 20.03.2007 and 02.07.2007 (Annexures AD and AF) and declined reliefs (ii) and (iii) of W.P.No.50964/2012.¶23
High Court of Karnataka (learned Single Judge / Writ Court) · 02.08.2024
Prior proceeding
Ex-employees filed three writ petitions challenging the punishment order dated 25.01.2006 of the Disciplinary Authority and the order dated 21.11.2011 of the Appellate Authority imposing termination from service.¶72
Prior proceeding
Earlier round: W.P.Nos.17095/2007 c/w 17092/2007 were filed against the termination penalty; the petitioners contended that under Rule 8.3 of the Karnataka Agro Industries Corporation Service Rules, 1969, termination could be imposed only on contract-appointed employees and they were permanent employees.¶73
Prior proceeding
First Single Judge round: findings of the Enquiry Officer and acceptance of the report by the Disciplinary Authority were upheld, but since the Appellate Authority did not deal with the specific Rule 8.3 ground in the memorandum of appeal, the matter was remanded to the Appellate Authority for fresh consideration.¶76
Prior proceeding
On remand, the Appellate Authority, by order dated 21.11.2011, converted the punishment of termination from service into dismissal from service.¶80
Prior proceeding
The dismissal order was challenged in the three writ petitions (W.P.Nos.50964/2012, 35645/2012 and 35646/2012); the learned Single Judge set aside the Disciplinary Authority's order dated 25.01.2006 and the Appellate Authority's order dated 21.11.2011 and directed payment of all consequential benefits.¶80