.._.............. .1...-m \.uuKI ur KAKNATAKA HIGH coma' or KARNA'1'KKA 341:»; 7
h "( By KG. Nayak, Adv. for 1:21 & Ki)
IN THE HIGH Comm' 0? KARNATAKA, BAz~zGAt; 0RE
DATED THIS THE) 33TH DAY 09 0CToBE~:I:g%$2%&§Qs "
THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE: Aq rrVJ'--C;t}N3AL *
WRIT PETFPIGN No,»4722 3i?_2'o07 I %
BF'I'W,. EEN: V' " x % V
Anfikumar S/0 Shara§;'1appa V. "
Aged about 49 years, ' 5' "
000: Senior Messfsnger, § '
Agricultural Cpligge, '
Raichur, fr' _. _ .
Now residi1é;gVat~«Ma141g§ V. "
'i'q. Bhaiki, 9.13:. ~ A'
V ' Pctiticner.
( By sfisharm;a£g:sa.ppg'zefl .?-Babshetty, Adv.)
And:
* ,1. V. ;;E~'h¢A.:U:1iVef<a;}ity'"uf'Ag'icu§tura1
V 3 ::"3ci'<~:1j1c.:eS-,. Dharwad, by its
' ''R€'g5:.sfr3::..
2. " __ }§é::_r€f1i?;-gtziative Officer
"{In§¥e1"&§ity of Agicultural
Siziéfices, Krishi Nagar,
~ .T .pha:waa-5.
The Associate Director &
Research, Regicnal Research Siation,
Rajchur, Dist. Raichur.
. . Respandents.
Jn INf'H"'\"\ LIEHIJ I-l\|I..llI_11ouu-
.......... ....m uuuxi ur KARNATAKA mow COURT or xARhiK"r'AkJK' "H161;
This Writ petition filed under Articles 226 .:~.Ǥ1d 227
of the Constitution, praying for quashing the-._ _"aWard
dated 9.10.2006, 'wide Annexure~N and tc:«~~-di:*§:ct.l' 1:113
respcncients ta reinstate the petitioner to.--£i'1evpb3{"§."ié}c£%".
by him etc.
This petition coming on fajfir an
'B' Group this day, the (301111: mérjefiié foiiov;%inVg:. " '
The petitioner. x is . A ' "Ar1i';ex11re~E\F.
Pursuant to dismissed
the 3.pp1icat.i{}3.1:A' im{::% gag tht: mcmsmaz
Disputes ' ' 'L
2. following manner:
Thé' 'p§:fit_i<§1:1::f4:.g§as;"'ivorki11g undsr the respondents
&1s%,’:?§.§37,e§$ :eI;V_g€r; A’V”Ov:-=::*”a psriod of time, he was promoted
L’ zsfié S§:;’1i§_§:’ :,’I*.}i::eTs.{senger. Suffice it to say ma: certain
wem levelled against. him. in respect of
“._VV§11iSfiE31’1%€?u’9.IV1O11I’. The petifionsr fked his reply denying
V’ “i;ha3’g€s ievelled against him. In fact, one of £116
charges is that he has misappropriated a ‘sum of Rs.
‘4 ‘?’760/~ by using a éuplicate key. The said explanaxion
did not find favour with the authsrity. Hence, an
enquiry was initiated. In the enquiry, he was found
INnr\’\ I..J£’\lLl Inr\lLJa|…nnnn..nu ._. ..m__ _ ..
_ . -_ ….,…,.. x..uuzn Ur mumnmxn I-WSHCOURT or I<ARi§iki.fAxA men
has a large family and pursuant {O tha enquiry
removed fmm the service.
4. I have: parused the ordsr
Ciourt.
5. The said order of _=:’;d’urt $311110: be
fauéied.
6. The nafjfgtiérg of ‘*;i1’é:A’.:vVL.’:~;§§:§§:’i’ts,::§ as stated, wouid
criaariy disclossé A’ §11éti:3I1’3:…__iar1ieI1cy was shown and
the pet1′;;_o”r1;er’ from the past 0%” Same?
Mas§eI2.ger utc; _ ifitast of Messenger and further a
};v*3;s iséfxed for recovery of Rs. 7′?5{}/W.
A*~NeI::vit§3Vé’£;ak;di2–“‘ the said Ienian ‘ shown, the etitiener
_ ‘lg G3′ F’
1162:’ to duty, but nevertheiess absented
“*31iI;1se§f..é:ubseq11ent1}? on the gonad of i}i–health which
was fiat supported by any éocuments.
V 7. Haxring regard to the fact that the petitioner has
not availed the munificence shown by the a1.);th0rit.ies,
-If} I)lf’!(“1″‘\ LI£’Ill_.i i.nn.n-n.-nu.-u can —
EEKRNAWEA men
..,…… ….m MUUKI ur KAKNATAKA HIGH COURT or
_ – ._. ..-.ua
he cannot new turn amurxi and claim fi’l8{j]h.iS
applicatizm far Imve for the relevant period A’
have been accepted by the authofities.
8. Having perzsed the i11;;f31g1éd_{i1″der,
. .
View that the question of shéfiézfig any 1é §fi€fl(3§’
wmfld be 3 mockaxyv ” prficéedings.
There is no merit in mskkpejmsai; iPat:§:o£: :£;L rejected,
EH03 H933-I VNVLVNHVX $0 3.2-H303 Hniu H\n-I:wrmn-M “-