EN THE HEGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BAi'~¥GALQ--§{'--.E
Dated: 226th day of Octaber 2o09M...[ ff %
Pxesent
Harms Mr.JUS'I'iCE V.C}C!.P,t?LLA_*C}C)%';?If}.§§":: _ 2 %
And = é %
Harms Mrs.JUs'r1C:i~: B.v. 1~m€sARAfrHNA '
WRITPE'H:2'2'O1\INo..§9S86/2fi09«_"(s}iK§:1)'
Between:
1.
The State of Kazinataka, ‘
Rep. by its SecretaIjy,in_th<§ ' ' . ' V I
Dfipartment 0fP¢iT301§§1'i¢i
Admiifistrative ' '
Vidhana Seudha, 1', '
Bangaiore-560 i1.
‘2. The Residefxt C€.3fi11*éiii:s$i<3fx$;*,V._.
Kan}atakaBh:3Van ' Kautflyawkiarg,
flew }I}a;¥’§é}i– 130 {Ii2E~…._ V
3;. I_i)eputy– Residential Commissierzer,
: Z33;g;~:x?e11fz.’_1..
Kaufiiya% .(“;1j::3naI<yapu1fi
A' ' 'New Dazihie 1; 13' '(:2 1, .4 J?E'}i'ITiQNERS
(By (}.K91ii€, ASA)
I%.=?§ ibai E-iarobalwadi,
A W] 0. Sri.AIj1m Doddamani,
" "Aged about 35 yaam,
Group-D Karnataka Bhavafl,
Kautilgsa Marg, Chaxzaliyapnri;
Nave' iD€1hi~1 18 Q2 1. …RESPOND}EN'I'
\/
GQVERNMENT op' INDIA). in that case, after refemngI::¢,:he
V…-
? Judges Constitution Bench decision reported
SC 21?? (Samsher Singh vs State of .,
32 it is heki as 1m<:1er:–
“It is, t¥1€:re:¥’0r&>.’,: zmw wirall’ s€tfi’é{1′._*t.t1_at
where the form of thrgegrder ‘5.Sv’EI1;€:fI’€Vi_§,r “21
Cameuflage for an ordéyv of dismissal for
misconduct itxis..V_a1 “‘.’&§?”$”QWI 1=.._11O t:he”‘«::::ur:
before which tf1s3.7′<}rd;€:r2.j_is '£2-hafiezlfgged to go
behirxd the farm "the trus
character-0f $1361" 'M-i'i€:r.'* _ 'I;{' %'[f1$i'§a {ZGHIT helds
that t1j:«;«:i3-jrfier mqugh iI1"i§':sVfo:f':n is mereiy
9. c1<:ts1rx}1i:f3gatic;:1'o:'-gémpizfiymttfii: is in reaiity
3. 02031;: ” {Or ‘ “-911 “‘r3j ;*:iI€f::’, A,-sf punishment, the
V;<If.iQ1V;11"'i;~ 'iv'€::;;1d, ._";1o~;, " bg Vélebaxred, Ilmreiy
; bec:;é;1s§;:*._V of $1516: 'feign 31" {he ordar, in giviizg
fifft3(it .t<j=t§:-)§:'Ari¢ghts–. Csnfarmd by law upon
the emp3.«._ V
A if «–.:%cc0:’ding1y, tbs Writ patition is diamisssé,
Sd/~
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE,’
MP