Rama Naik Vs the Presiding Officer — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

Rama Naik Vs the Presiding Officer — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Relief as prayed (quashing of the impugned order and direction to Respondent No.1 to reconsider the preliminary issue afresh) was not granted; the petition was disposed of with liberty reserved to the petitioner to raise the fairness-of-enquiry issue at a later point of time in an appropriate proceeding, if need arises.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Domestic Enquiry held against the I party (the petitioner) is fair and valid? +1 more

Ratio / Principle

Since the issue raised is covered by this Court's order dated 01.12.2025 in Basavaraja (Writ Petition No.105480/2025), the petition is disposed of rather than decided on merits.

Key takeaways

Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to raise the issue relating to the fairness of the domestic enquiry at a later point of time in an appropriate proceeding, if need arises.ratio¶39

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru (Anant Ramanath Hegde, J.), Oral Order dated 07.04.2026 in Writ Petition No. 38924 of 2025 (L-RES) [NC: 2026:KHC:19091]: The petitioner, Rama Naik, a clerk (now dismissed) aged about 67 years, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking quashing of the order dated 29/09/2025 in ID No. 37/2018 passed by the Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Bangalore (Respondent No.1) vide Annexure-AB, whereby the Tribunal held, on preliminary issue No.2 ('Whether the Domestic Enquiry held against the I party is fair and valid?'), that the domestic enquiry is fair and proper; he also sought a direction to the Tribunal to reconsider the preliminary issue afresh. Counsel submitted that the issue is covered by this Court's order dated 01.12.2025 in Basavaraja Vs. The Presiding Officer, CGIT and another (Writ Petition No.105480/2025), wherein the Court took the view that a finding that the domestic enquiry is fair and proper can be assailed in a subsequent proceeding in case the claim of the workman is rejected. Holding 'this being the position', the Court disposed of the petition, reserving liberty to the petitioner to raise the issue relating to the fairness of the enquiry at a later point of time in an appropriate proceeding, if need arises. Respondent No.2 is the Deputy General Manager, Canara Bank (erstwhile Syndicate Bank).

1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:19091 WP No. 38924 of 2025

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO. 38924 OF 2025 (L-RES)

BETWEEN:

RAMA NAIK, S/O CHOMA NAIK, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, OCC: CLERK (NOW DISMISSED) R/O MATRU SHRIKRUPA BUILDING, DOOR NO.123, NEAR MCE COLLEGE, OPP AIR, SALGAMA ROAD, VIDYUTH NAGAR, HASSAN 573 201. SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI UROOJAHMED J HAVALDAR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed by PRAMILA G V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

THE PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, CUM LABOUR COURT, SHRAM SADAN, G G PALYA, TUMKUR ROAD, YESWANTHPUR BANGALORE - 560 022.

THE DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER, CANARA BANK (ERSWHILE SYNDICATE BANK). REGIONAL OFFICE, YAJAMANA ARCADE, PM ROAD, KUVEMPUNAGAR, MYSURU - 573 023.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI M RAJASHEKHAR, AGA FOR R1, SRI RAMESH UPADHYAYA, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A) QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 29/09/2025 IN ID

2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:19091 WP No. 38924 of 2025

HC-KAR

NO. 37/2018 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 VIDE ANNEXURE-AB), DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.1 TO RECONSIDER THE PRELIMINARY ISSUE AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, IN LIGHT OF THE PETITIONERS PLEADINGS, EVIDENCE AND LEGAL SUBMISSIONS, AFTER GRANTING DUE OPPORTUNITY TO THE PETITIONER.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

ORAL ORDER

Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and

the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

submits that the issue raised in the present petition is covered in terms of the order of this Court dated 01.12.2025 passed in Basavaraja Vs. The Presiding Officer, CGIT and another¹

The petitioner has filed the petition assailing the

order on preliminary issue No.2. The said issue reads as under:

"Whether the Domestic Enquiry held against the

I party is fair and valid?"

1 Writ Petition No.105480/2025

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:19091 WP No. 38924 of 2025

HC-KAR

In terms of the impugned order, the Tribunal has

held that the domestic enquiry is fair and proper. In the aforementioned judgment, the Court has taken a view that the said finding can be assailed in a subsequent proceeding in case the claim of the workman is rejected.

5. This being the position, the petition is disposed of .

Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to raise the issue relating to the fairness of the enquiry at later point of time in an appropriate proceeding, if need arises.

Sd/(ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE

brn

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 83