Hiru S/O Shivappa Lamani vs The Divisional Controller Nwkrtc on 22 October, 2008

IGH COHRT OF KARNATAKA - ' .
H193   KARNATAKA HKGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA H1634 COURT OF KARNATAKA HEGH C

IMHE HIGH comm' OF KARNATAI{A;
CIRCUIT BENCH AT GULBARGA   .  

DATEDTHIS THE 22nd my OF ocr§§iiE1%;%%(2{)és  & 

BEFc§RE   3  T
THE HON'BLE MR.,JIJS'l'§E',E~-AJFT r.§UNJA'I."- V  %

WRIT PETITION [$3493  

BETVJEEN :

Sri Hiru s[c£Shi'va;ppa{ * 

   'V   
Age 35;yéairs;'*».v--:'_V_ V   
Occ: Nil,  ;'_ Q '   ._
R/0"M'fld3ifl31"§'?)s   
Tqi. Muddebi1f1._a1,% * _ " _
Disi:.'Bija'p11i'.'«.""L«.   "

Petitioner.

"{    Anneppanavar, Adv. )
   

 ._   : T3qeV~T.I}i§visiona1 Controller

V. .NL;'_W.K.R.T.C. Bagalkot D'wn.,
  B"-agalkot, Dist. Bagalkot.

' "   The ifiivisional Con1:ro11er

N.W.K.R.'I'.C. Bijapur iI):'tvn.,
Bijapur, Dist. Bijapur.
Respondents.

( By Sri Subhash Mallapur, Adv. )

2-..-

This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and
22′? of the Constitution, praying to quash the award
dated 12.6.2003 vicie Annexure-B and to direct the

such suppression was not detected before the ‘efififioyee
is confirmed, he will be terminateci. So 4′
simplicitor cannot be tI’eatedV.as .a
failure to mention this fact
treated as suppression. csse__ to
noticed that the petifniener. of these
category. He is nor was he
discha1’ged§..lg:,;:,:.§agai1:IV~ee%?i:’ Indeed it is to he
noticed ” well as Bijapur the
erequifies, but for different
miscenauct. of the View that the mid
regulatieiisfifl any assistance to him.

= as other material is concerned i.e., the

Ae.V:ideI1eeL’ is let in, in fact, the Labour Court has

AA besiosfied its attention on various asmcts of the matter

11″.}.-ei1.1cii11g the case of misappropriation in Bagtalkot

Sub-Divisien. in fact an enquiry was initiated and a

SGH COURT OF KAQNATAKA HEGH OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA i-§iGH CI

finding is recorded.

X

EGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH C’: ‘ .
BET C4)!-1 KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH C:

7. Having regard to the conduct of the ;)etitie11er,

both at Bagalkot as well as Bijapur Divisiojfi; IV ‘

View that dismissal of I’Ci’C1′(3I1:€JE§A’Vz?x}2)'[}’1i€i’.¥:V1f’.i:;{fi1.’V:.
faulted. Indeed, it is aise to
dismissal of the reference ‘besis of L’
the material on rec<:£*dV_aas wé'11:A§§f, evide1-icef

Hence, there isa rejected.

Rule ais¢ 1;;1rgee. e

sale

1”99.– ..