1
IN THE men comm' OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY 0;? JULY, 2008
BEFORE "V*"%
THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT J0 %%
WRIT PETI"l'iON No 39302 0:? 2002; _
BETWEEN :
1 SINGA SHETPY s/o LATE_NARAsIMHA
40 YRS, 0/0 SMT. RANGAMMA, 0
KUMBARA BEEDHI,_ PERIYAPATNA,
MYSORE DIST. 0 ' u
PETITIONER.
(By Sri '1' N RAGIEUPATI-133,. 'A1:>v,Av00,_)
1 KARNATAi{A'PQW'fi3R'
TRAN1smssi0NA .COI§?{)RATION LTD
CTAUVERY mmvziw KEMPEGOWDA ROAD,
..E3AN'GALORE, V
,%REP;% EYES %%%%%
ENGINEER (ELECTRICAL)
. 0 as Mg»DEVESION, MESCOM,
0 __MAmKE.jI<E.
RESPONLQENTS.
% 001§13§;'Ts:~5 N. NAGARAJA RAO, A9V.' FOR
sR:H.AR0<:R1s1--:NA s HOLLA, ADV. )
THIS WP FXLED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
f'I'HE CONSTITUTION, PRAYING T0 DECLARE THAT THE
ORDER 012 12.9.2002 BY R1 VIBE ANN~A IS ILLEGAL AND
QUASH THE SAME.
THIS PETETION comma ON FOR HE:AR1NerT-"T3113
DAY, THE cover MABE THE FOLLOWING: . W
O R D E R V
The petitioner at the relevant time K V'
Mechanical Grade II, MEscoM,V'e:e¢s15:men'gaiHa*
Madikere. It appears in the iH~
health the pefitioner had to go VonWieaV'e,. to say
that for over a period of absent.
Thereafter he was Weettransfened to
Hass-an. *1*1:e of transfer is at
Annexure~(5.¥. for additional three days
casual _ie_ave'%°'e» ""jr7.x.2ooo and 19.1.2000.
respondent authority issued an
the services of the petitioner. A
t”‘e—copy of at Ar1nex:,1re-«A, which is impugned in
e ~ t.t’e;*e;e.s’peeeon.,7
__Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits
the petitioner reported to duty after unazxthorised
t Absence and he was taken on duty which would necessaxilyfl
mean that the unauthorised absence is deemed to _.hso’re»_ilaeen
condoned. In the aiternate he submits that
an enquiry as contemplated under’ XE’./.’;VE’3n1}§ioyees” » _
(Classification, Diseipiinary Control”and:_’
1937, the petitioner could nétf-have”‘imcn_diss:issedi semis
service.
3. Learned counsel respondents
submits that 14-(El)-V’of Regulations if an
empioyee ” is . sfijsefit; mssnfliorisodly for a long period,
dismissalis the’ ()$ZV}3.3iv”€13′}i)’i;i€_):I”iA.IEJEEIICC he justifies Annexure-A.
4. In .15. fioi. disgoute that the petitioner was
in é_sbseni’ifor one year. But what is significant
‘flfi1s!_t’_ Vheiviwssi on duty and thereafter transferred to
Hsssan. it is to be noticed that if the petitioner has
a§sen.iee “himself after reporting to duty, that wouid be a
_’_sep:aV3’ate cause of action for which a show cause notice is
‘T .:’..:1’eqiiir*ed to be issued calling for explanation and before any
x inajor penalty of dismissal is imposed an enquiry is a mustfl
/’
4
Indeed the regulation which is sought to be pressee into
service would contemplate regarding speciai in
certain matters. Indeed regulation 14(2)
that where the officer cencemed 1;-.-as
the officer concerned does not
where for any reasons to sit
impracticable to communicate”””vt’i:t.ftj”him, it A or Wihere the
cliseiplinary authority, fee to reeorded in writing,
is satisfied that it ‘isjiot ireaisoflabijfiiipraeticable to foiiow the
rocedurev’ Vinthe ations, a roceedin
could be
5. Indeeé; could be pressed into service,
4. enqtiiryeeis to ¥3e.V..eondlucted and of the employee does not
i”resApez1c::1 notice and does not participate in the
encfuiry,’ a:n”.”_”ir2i7erence could be drawn that he is not
interesteei proceedings. But that is not the case here.
“‘I”he oti hand is that even before issuing a Show cause
__1″1i5oticgei’ upon him to explain his unauthorised
‘absence, Annexure—A is passed dismissing him from service.
{V
. “W
5
Consequently, I am of the View that the entire
adopted by the respondent is in violation of ,of
natural justice and also in violation of regu1atic«I 1j’s. : ‘A
6. Consequently, the following oi%§ier:_-iso;fJo[ssed:’- 4′
The petition is a1iowed.VLAm1ex{I£c’¥A v
Liberty is reserved to the to if
they choose to do so. A .. T
Rifle is mad4¢ea§Somie;:” :1: Sd/’I.
Judge