WP No.l9926i200'I
nu THE HIGH count or !{ARllATA_.'Eii&" 44 :1
cmcurr amen V '-- 1i7.j "
mvmn nus mg 2013 an (S1? n§3*ar*7'saAmm~1r.:,"2ooa '
moan
THE uomzm Mmazfsébxcg
wan' Pm:r:oz§;.mo.'i9§;_g:61s-ans;
I_3.;..et.._:_<2..e.n;;
Raxnudu, § v . , .... ..
Aged about .3:4"j,?é:a_1's'..,..---':V--_
S/0 late Smt§?_'e(i<_iégkkai'8a
Working' as --
At Ward No.2; V "V -. " ~ ' '
Bellary Mah%a1'a «_ " " < . "
Be1L'a1y--583 "10 1 anti _rcaki.=I.ng
At Smexampuiaxzi Cxxionjz,
__Bc11ar3«_':i}583 101." _ PETITTOHER
, for
Advs)
_--__.......u--- ,
. ' I . ,
.. _Be11a1y-533 101,
V' 'By its Commissioner.
Director of Mumc' ipa1Admm1' 'strat:ion,
Bangaiorc-560 001. RESPOHDENTB
A" Sri.T.H.Rnghupathy. Adv for R1.
m.n.x.mu:ti, scan» for R2)
' Q
WP No.l992&f2G£)'7
This petition is filed under arms' 16 226 of
of India praying to quash vide dt.2'7.8.2007 eri~.Ai1neXurc-- '*
AD issued by the R2 and order (it. 1;9.2o¢o7'e
notice dt. 20.09.2007' vide Anncxure--Y, botbhiesued .by- thefR_1
issue of a Writ in the nature of 'eu_1d~
eonsequentiai benefits including '£316 pe'ii!"io;1er as in _ V w
eonfinuous as if the 0rd of s;_ispensic"m._ tit, '
2907 and the proceedings puzsaant to 'tb.e n'oI:ice dt.20*h
September 2007 were never in....e;§§Zstex;ee with. service
benefits including fail bael_m.:age:s' agd . _
This petition coming oe hearing in 'B'
group, this day, the
1. The in % this wn't petition
the Commissioner of Bellaxy
._Ps.1§1<¢ petitioner under suspension
pending, tee 'gonad that he has obtained
=e %%¢mp1oyn$cntee fhbricated documents, Annexure-Y
to appear before the Enquiry Oficcr
' «and order passed by the 2"' respondent to
and for appropriate action against the
_ case of the petitioner is that his mother
‘SiI§tPeddakka wa sworking as a Ponra Karmike in the 1″
V’ respondent-Municipal Corporation. She dim on 2o.o7.1932.A
WP No.I9926J2G0?
Anncxure-A is the death certificate. The
application for appointment on» 9 T
Respondent No.1 being satisfied
petitioner appointed him as ‘ dutjf V
and was working as .’ Afiszr V2 years,
disciplinaqr cnquixy wasm on the ground
that he has obtained basis of fabricated
documents. is not the son of
Smt. Pcdtiakl;a,, initiated on the basis
of a by one Adeppa who claims to
be the {at The petitioner initiated
O.S.No_.4,95/ tiic I” respondent, the Tahsildar and
t’he as wall as “”” authozifics seeking for a declaration
V’ T. of Smt.Peddakka and for an injunction
suit declaring that he is the son of Smt.Pe<idakka.
___"'f.'I:1e «:leii=:3:1dants I and 2 have not chalknged the said order. On
contraxy, the moactaxy benefits had been pafi to the
petitioner in pursuance to the smld order. 'When things stood
Ex/4
WP N"o.I9926/2307
thus. these impugned orders are issued Keeping
him under suspension ordering enquiry againgi
is served on him to appear _'_befQ_Ie
Therefore, the petitioner is
seeking for quashing of ma? Qid-…°¥'dei3;- V V vé
3. The I” respondent contend
that While the civil dgesggga as the son of
SmtPeddakka, them fmm
proceeding On the contrary,
it eespondent as a statutory
authtnity an enquixy to go into the
allegations? that the petitioner secured
_ empégpfment ” fabricated documents and therefom
A they the action initiated by them is legal and valid
ani..’.—-.doVv from any illegaiity which cans for interference
‘ hyi*m’s
“:. ¢§~, I/earned counsel for the peiitioner assaiizh g the
‘ iizapllmed order conmnds that when once the Civii Court has
H granted a declaration that he is the son of Smt.Peddakka and
W? No. I9926J200’?
defendants 1 and 3 fmm proceeding with the
from disturbing the scmoes of the
categorically stated that defenc;ian’£%_{ I
authorities have a _hol;ti”
employees, if a complaint is obtained on the and that they are at liberty The saici judgment any of the parties. It is but equafiy on the
plainfifi’s,_ 1 -by paying monetaly benefits in
terms acquiesce” in the fact that he is
the ; sag oi’: The quesfion for eonsiderafion
. ” befoevei is whether the documents on the
the piaintifi claims that he is the son of
Sxaf. are fabricated or not. The civii court has made
it it has not gone into the said question and it ‘m
to the enquixy ofioer to go into the said question and that
R why it dismissed the suit of the plainfifi insofir as decree of
permanent injuncfiimn is concerned. it is in puxsuanee of the
same, the authorities are pmceeding with the ensquizty.
xx,/e
WP No.19926r’2007
5
acting on the said declaration, all monetary
paid to the petitioner, the 1″ 3
pmceed;n’ gs against
recorded by the trial Court are
anfi therefore he submits ‘E off:
without jurisdiction *~then:’f§#1§ toé
5. Per conhfa, the respondents
supported 2
6. 1 has 13% a suit for a
dmzazafigu that of Smt. Peddakka and also sought
for the authorities from holding any
V. – c1i£;€it’§,r’ i1″ié«vgenuincness of the documents which he
the time’ of sec1mn’ g exnpiaoyment. The civil’ ‘
deemed the suit and has granted a docxaratm
that {ICES the son of Smtfedziakka and that he is the younger
“ii of defendant No.4. Thc said dcczlaration is grantw on
V basis ofthc documents which are pmduced in the case wxi
marked as exhibits. However, the relief of misfit
injunction sought for by the plaintifis restraining the
\.a/
‘W? N0.19926f20G7
Thcrefom, it cannot be said that initiation May:
proceeding with the enquiry, is” (int « dif
illegal or contraty to the judm<=:;1t_ 'A '
afoncsaxd' cum' '1 suit. in that "of thé s:n__.ait:;1V'," :i
merit in this writ pefitjqn. ItVAis-iécoiiiingly
Sd/–
Judge