{"id":244498,"date":"2011-06-03T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-06-02T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mudalagirigowda-so-thimmegowda-vs-the-chief-engineer-e-on-3-june-2011"},"modified":"2017-09-23T02:50:50","modified_gmt":"2017-09-22T21:20:50","slug":"mudalagirigowda-so-thimmegowda-vs-the-chief-engineer-e-on-3-june-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mudalagirigowda-so-thimmegowda-vs-the-chief-engineer-e-on-3-june-2011","title":{"rendered":"Mudalagirigowda S\/O Thimmegowda vs The Chief Engineer (E) on 3 June, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Mudalagirigowda S\/O Thimmegowda vs The Chief Engineer (E) on 3 June, 2011<\/div>\n
Author: Anand Byrareddy<\/div>\n
E\n\nIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT\nBANGALORE \n\nDATED THIS THE 03\") DAY oF JUNE we  \n\nBEFORE\n\nTHE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE   7\n\nWRIT PETITION No.-'2;z771 orszoos  I \n\nB ETWEEN :\n\nShrir. Mudalagirigowda,  \n\nS\/0 Thimmegowda,\n\nAged 55 years,  __ i  _  \nWorking as Ju:iior}:joEngiriLeeri;     \nKarnataka I?oW'\u00a3;\u00abrTra'i:;srI1'i.\u00a7--3jo'nV   '\nCorporation Lirilited, \" 9 'T   V\nAr~ka1godr'Ta1uE,  _\n\nRe3idir:g at_2.\"df\u00bb-*i.a--i11_,\"'a \" 'V _\n\n2\" Cross? Hem21vatb\u00a7\"Npag.;\u00a7\u00a7f; \nArkalgod, \" V  _  \" \nHasS3n.,Distri'ct._\u00bbV    ...PETITIONER\n\n\\' \u00ab.   'KHiriya\ufb01\ufb01\u00e9r;Advocate)\n\n1.  The'CE\"{ief Engineer (E)\nKar::1ataI<a Power Transmission\n\n 'A  CVo'rporation Limited,\na _  Works,\n\nM}:sore.\n\n5\n\n\n\nEx.)\n\n2. The Superintendent Engineer\nKarnataka Power Transrnission\nCorporation Limited\n{Major Woiiis), No. I 55 1,\n\nC & D Block, Shivararn Road,-I  A  \nKuvempunagar,   A.      \nMysore - 570 023. V 7..,_   0'\n\n(By Shri. P.S. Dinesh Kumar, Atj;\u00a7ocatei.f.r Res_'p(>h*\u00a7ieht No.2, \n\nRespondent No.1 Served)<\/pre>\n
This Writ Petition*–<isiffi1ed u;;tdei'–..rArtii'e1_es 226 and 227 of
\nthe Constitution of India prayi,rrg\u00b0t,o {;_ai'l.ii_'for'V_the records and
\nquash the order gassed hy"Respo–n\u00a7ie_n't .No:2v.v"dated 26.08.2004
\nVide Annexure\u00a7=K'ao.' far as the ;3et'i\u00abtio'n:er.. i_seonCei'ned and etc"<\/p>\n
This ':Wi*i_\u00a3;"'Petiit'iot1 'i'sf.c.oiiiing  for Hearing this day, the
\ncourt made th\u20acVf0iiQ:WViIigf"  " 5'<\/p>\n
"f0QRDER<\/p>\n
A.-Heardidthe 'ievarnediieottnsei for the petitioner and the<\/p>\n
— V, ,.,.,res’}\u00a7ohdents’;– _Thouigh”‘thie respondents have not filed Statement<\/p>\n
r__’o’f_ih_the learned Counsel appearing for the<\/p>\n
responde_ntsr’i3.Vhas canvassed legal eontentionst on which the<\/p>\n
 petition, ace(>r’dii1g to him, ought to be dismissed.<\/p>\n
\u00a7<\/p>\n
2;.)<\/p>\n
2. The facts are as follows:\n<\/p>\n
The petitioner while working  alS’to_re,Keeper&in_Major<\/p>\n
Works Divisional Stores at Hassan, Wa__si’~:.ept und–er”‘svt:spe’nsi~on’g<\/p>\n
pending a departmental inc;uir”y,p:.”‘~..yg An. inqu’i.:fyj”_;\\\ufb02\/asldv’initiated V<\/p>\n
against him by the issttanee of  dated  10.2000.\n<\/p>\n
There were five charges  that the
\npetitioner, whiley\/torking’  had not taken
\ncertain stocrkaito   his service as a
\nStore I\u00a7e_epVer’;~.hfe  copper wire by removing
\na large:Quantity’T’a;n.at1thorl_s’evdly. f The third charge was that he
\nhad shiftedlntaterialsroflthei’Corporation in a lorry along with<\/p>\n
two eautsidersx, t-herehy exposing the property of the Corporation<\/p>\n
alto’ “losses; Fourthlygmit was alleged that he had remained<\/p>\n
 ahzsent from duty without handing over Charge<\/p>\n
of the Stores; ll Finally, it was alleged that on account of his<\/p>\n
V’-\u00bb.unautht>vr}sed absence, there was a shortage of material which he<\/p>\n
Vlltad not accounted for.\n<\/p>\n
5<\/span><\/p>\n
There was an order for j.*:)’l’I”it–..l1’tql1i1’y4l’2t\u00a7;3itlsvf._:’p.tllL7{<\/p>\n
petitioner and one R.Antappa, \u00a31 d1’i\\}er, 7._who iw-as’ .i.ri\\.n<)l'a?_etl._iiinp<\/p>\n
the acts alleged against the._petitioner, ._An, was* '<\/p>\n
Conducted by a retired District  The  officer on a
\ndetailed examination of 'record, held that the
\nallegations were not proy.ed:.._ Ig\ufb01cgnd respondent
\nissued 3.    seeking to differ
\nwith the    and proposing to impose
\npunish;nelnt.'' * ldnlllyivlreplied to the show–cause
\nnotice.  thereafter in Variance with the<\/p>\n
inquiry oft:icer's finvdings\ufb01issed a final order holding that the<\/p>\n
  charges: were proVed_..a.nd imposed a. punishment of recovery of<\/p>\n
 'Rs.'8.3,2vl_8;iI'7_liiimonthly instalments and directed withholding<\/p>\n
 "twoV'8Qn'nu'\u00e9i:lV' increments with eurnnlative effect. The<\/p>\n
petl"t-toner'ehtillenged the same by way of an appeal and the<\/p>\n
 l\ufb02apppeal id-sit) having been dismissed, the petitioner is before this<\/p>\n
i' ' — "_eonrt';_\u00ab<\/p>\n
3<\/span><\/p>\n
 The learned counsel for the petitioner r*e*ite:=21ti:’ig7 <\/p>\n
the above would submit that RegLIlati()n_.2%%.  <\/p>\n
Power Transmission Corp0rati~:>n Empletyees 1{fCEa.sisific2i;tie’n, <\/p>\n
Discipline, Centrol and Appealjii”RLegulatieiisi i’l\u00a7.E\u00a77  pan’
\nmcztericz with Regul2itiefr~~3f(2)_\u00ab”def Bank
\nOfficer Employees’ (Discihiiinyeiiaiid:’iAp;efe:fi1}f.heguiatiens 1977,
\nwhich Came in; i.Thf\u00a7\u00a7f’3ihdg\u20ac Bench of the
\nSupreme  and others vs. Kunj
\nBelzari  i “and’insefar as the disciplinary
\nauth01*ity_  notice seeking to differ<\/p>\n
from the iii:-quii:fy ieffie5:fr”sifinding and to impose punishment<\/p>\n
 and.~\u00a7;thei” disciipii–nary__’authority not having indicated the<\/p>\n
 he sought to differ with the inquiry officer,<\/p>\n
iii’was–_helid \u00abti{;_v.he~ii,;i\u00a7”yi0lati0n of the said Regulations and the apex<\/p>\n
Co\ufb01rt ha..d.h’ei’d that the proceedings stood vitiated on account of<\/p>\n
_i’thelt_sam’e.i it is based on the said judgment that the learned<\/p>\n
if  \u20ac’_e>ti’iE’siel fer the petitioner would seek that the present petition be<\/p>\n
  __a_llewedi<\/p>\n
5<\/span><\/p>\n
49 The learned counsei for the respondentsegg’;ttljdsuhirnitli V’ <\/p>\n
that the sequence of events and theTiroi’e’ofl.the\u00abnetitioner’ <\/p>\n
found by the inquiry officer and eVirie_nt’;from  Arn.2:i’er1:-:iil’–on’~.<\/p>\n
record would clearly justify thev..i.r”e1as(>ning._ofwthe dlseiplinary V<\/p>\n
authority and the punishment inzposefl ‘Ville woilultl-Afurfher point
\nout that Regulation 2A   drsC\u00a5.plinary authority
\nto assign or to i1iidi.e’at\u00a7:a,;h{\u00a7\\i.  C14 he sought to
\ndiffer from  Therefore, it is a
\ntechniCel_it_y  to rely to contend that
\nthe proleeediniggslisijoodVvitivzited, In this regard, he would seek to
\nplace  the Supreme Court in the case of<\/p>\n
P.D’.;;lgrayi=aZ if v.22″, Sfdte  of Inclia, (2006)8 SCC 776, which<\/p>\n
 incidentally ‘rendered by a Two Judge Bench of the<\/p>\n
  pointedly referred to Punjab Narionai Bank<\/p>\n
o2zri5Z.a_r)rf2er*,s1l_ which is sought to be relied upon by the<\/p>\n
“-..petitioner}- and 21 View has been expressed to the following<\/p>\n
i’ ‘ — ieffeetf<\/p>\n
5<\/span><\/p>\n
“[)eei5;7z;i2 of \u00a3125.: C\u00e9f\u00e9fi? 3:2 \u00a7I1i.Kczg2(2();’ v, J’\u20acI\u00a7,_?i’?3{,?’\/’_?,.{ \u00a7’i’f. <\/p>\n
wize;*ez:pe:>:z Mi:Ra0 pfcaeed .siz’:):2g re:’i.:mee {(2 e{2:\/zZ_e.\u00a7_7zf ‘2i52a:;_’rV”  ‘<\/p>\n
220;:-0b5;ervzsi?ee (ff prz’z:ei;)Ie Qfmzzzgrczf j\u00a3\u00abz.$*2’z’ee ;}t<;e2f;'3ecszezgeks'<\/p>\n
g);\/ejucfiee 0:’ the same sfzmizf F205 -fxz\u00e9wziczcjf “-‘as’ iv: “::;.:z;s-e\u00a7\u00ab;v<\/p>\n
55517 Vie’; 5}’ {<'f!'?"\u20acif\u20aceI:iz'c'e", e51nze2()Z ize \ufb01f\u00e9\u00e9icf; '21; .,\/Jesze cIi3eDf\u00e9<;e':z'ib\u00a7e'i2\u00a2: 'e..<\/p>\n
the 512315112! ease. The {)!"fI?r\u20ac'2_;[)[\u20ac?,S' Q,'-  zezcsfseszztf .Tii\u00a3–}Jifeef, as' '<\/p>\n
;20z'ieed l2e1'ez'n13ef0re, have \u00a3\u00a3f7\u00a7tl\u20ac37\u00a7fg()?'?\u20ac' (2 sec: -ehizgzgex  '<\/p>\n
\\~'f(%W of {he az'eei.<;i0n.s' off ffzis C(3gi?'z..fg2 S2_fczfe Bz:i:ir_Qf'Pc1l\u00a7aEc:
\nV. S.K.Slzarmi\ufb01p!{i’i12cz’m;’,_7?ze’_ Cgizizfi has sizzfted<\/p>\n
from its ;:3ariE 2: ‘eazze-e;7z’\u00a7 I\/iizz e\ufb01ene as ‘.’sm4z!-I violation S\/tall<\/p>\n
re_s’uZt;’in VI_:12(‘.”:’}!1″Z_(?l’ hez’.{zg”~.ifei2cIe:ied__c2 nullizfy T0 the<\/p>\n
‘1<\/p>\n
pz’iz2c*i;)z’e\/d};>e;e<\/p>\n
{He (,3\/’*7 \u00e9iaidi ‘ Vezlter\u00e9un partem, a clear
\n::Zi.9IiI2ee”tiez’\u00a7\u00bb has 7f?een_ lag! down between the cases where
\nI;{zez’e wczs no f2zgzziirzg’cgz “ct-7__Z cznd the ease..s’ where there was
\nmere i’eci1ze2’i::VaZA ‘ !I2:2;,”_r’iIV2ig.e1e’7’ezc).z:=Z’ Qf the prineipie. The C(}LlI’l<\/p>\n
czppZZe:2_Vz’l1e ;2ri31c’iApfeLs”0;’ zzcznzrczl jusIi\u00ab:’e lzaving regara’ 20<\/p>\n
‘ ficefcwz .9i’iz:gzt’fez2 abuzczizzing in eczch ease. It is not czppiiegi<\/p>\n
‘ Eire: V{{CL\u00a3\u00a3ti’}’?. wifizbiif re ‘ereizce {0 Ike reZevc.:I2Z_fL<1c'f5 am!<\/p>\n
L".T\u00a3Ti'<'i'l4\u00a7i?'l,\u00a7'feZ'i?\u20ac63' afzize came. it is no unmiy izorse. It e::mm)z<\/p>\n
be' ji:–u_f iz\u00e9kz…:Zn:zizf,Eczg::'!<eifbrzmsia. {See Vive\/ca Nana' Selizi vs.<\/p>\n
zAV}E?_\u00a7?i'(%}WC\u00a3.S'Ii?f. See aiso A\/I(2f2cf.S(z;"Icz;' us'. Szazfe off U.P,;<\/p>\n
C.\u00a7;:zf\u00a7'2:e\u00a7;2iV; J & K Bczzzk Limited. And State of UP; vs.<\/p>\n
3}<\/p>\n
5<\/span><\/p>\n
Therefore, the iearned counsel wouid_..suhfinVit=.that not ‘<\/p>\n
every infraction eoiiid be heid to vitviiate the. p’i’r)e:ee<i_i13g:evv and it<\/p>\n
would depend on the facts and eireu1'n_st'ances ofj_ieaeh'~ea'se','<to'–..<\/p>\n
address whether there is prejridieev-ieaused..to=_aj"_dei:indiient in<\/p>\n
holding that a pai'tic:i.i.ia1' woiiild'-A viitiate the
\nproceedings. In the instant  the petitioner had
\nbeen furnished  a  he was placed on
\nnotice of  intention to vary with the
\nfinding_.o.f. had been granted an
\nopporti1.nity  -clearly indicate that there was no
\nserious   the petitioner even if the<\/p>\n
disciplinary authority had failed to indicate the reasoning on<\/p>\n
 heiihtje'nded to differ with the inquiry offiC.er's report and<\/p>\n
ii"'he'nee;  would submit that the law laid down in<\/p>\n
Przrzjrzb _]'v'rIrE\u00a7;sziaZ Bcmic and orlzers would have to be read in<\/p>\n
Hecinjuiieti\u00e9in with the reasoning and the opinion expressed in the<\/p>\n
ii'iii_Aia\u00a3\u00a7\u00a7riij.tidgi'I1\u20ac11E in R[).AgrczwczE.<\/p>\n
3<\/span><\/p>\n
9<\/span><\/p>\n
5. In the above facts and eiietirnstanczes, ‘i\u00abttis'(>.’i:2’iEf. ‘<\/p>\n
question whether the pro<:eedings stnotl~-y.itia\u20ac_e<i oin"a';:eon..ti't of<\/p>\n
the disciplinary authority not having i\u00abndi:::at'ed the_vi*e.asQni\u00a7ig._on..<\/p>\n
which he sought to differ xi\/iith'~\u00bb..t_he opiiiiongiicif iritiuiry "<\/p>\n
officer in the show–cau_se notice _i'ssned_ to the..,P@t'iti(iner is<\/p>\n
concerned, the answer is'    hearing that was
\nproposed under the sh:e'w';c?i:t1s\u00a7.  with pointed
\nreference to_  u    i 'disciplinary authority
\nsought  If that was not made
\nl<\ufb02OW1"1igi0 ipie'i:iVtilVoiii1er,'<the….hearing that was afforded to him
\nwas notiiwitil; referenee reasoning of the disciplinary<\/p>\n
auth<:;rit:;_anci '-thereiforet. the petitioner was definitely at a<\/p>\n
i"disaElvani.age'~in making out a ease as to how the reasoning of<\/p>\n
"-the\u00ab.iinqLii.ryf\u00aboffieer' ought to be sustained. Hence, the absence of<\/p>\n
an express .re*qui1'ement under Regulation 2A is immaterial.<\/p>\n
ii   'vaf3parentl}.t also the reasoning of the apex Court in<\/p>\n
i' ho?-eiiiiig that such reasoning ought to be disclosed in the show\u00bb<\/p>\n
 _e_;:\u00a7use notice issued while eonsideririg the effect of non-<\/p>\n
3<\/span><\/p>\n
10<\/span><\/p>\n
compliance in that regard with reference to Reg:–;’latio.n:<\/p>\n
  is<\/p>\n
the Punjab National Bank Officer Einipioyeeslitiljisieiplinejgarid <\/p>\n
Appeal) Regulations 1977. Therefore, it::.earinot”he’<\/p>\n
absence of the reasoning in tlie”‘show~e’ause. not.iee\u00abV.__’would not-i<\/p>\n
prejudice the petitioner and  petit’ion._AtoV_that extent
\nwould succeed. Insofar\ufb01asp  whether the joint
\ninquiry was preceded by:.arr* is a question of
\nfact. The  would submit that
\nthis was 3 tiorrrnailifty \u00a7$;;usai;e:1\u00a7isoCr::s1nu be} normally complied in the
\nusual course’ ~t\ufb01e..bg-nefit of the record, he is not in a
\nposition   an order has been passed. In<\/p>\n
any event, this’-quesition could be left open in the light of the<\/p>\n
  court while allowing this writ petition and setting<\/p>\n
   order would direct that the matter he<\/p>\n
rerni.tted_vto theidiseiplinary authority in order that a fresh show-<\/p>\n
 “eause notice be issued, indicating the reasoning on which the<\/p>\n
 disciplinary authority seeks to differ with the inquiry officer<\/p>\n
  2  after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner may<\/p>\n
5<\/span><\/p>\n
pass fresh orders in accardance with {aw
\nVxfh\ufb01th\ufb01i’ there was; an order, preceding<\/p>\n
was ccsnducted, is left open.\n<\/p>\n
  1 _ <\/p>\n
Hence,  <\/p>\n
the j<)if1\ufb01in:;'uir:y Vthzii: V'<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Mudalagirigowda S\/O Thimmegowda vs The Chief Engineer (E) on 3 June, 2011 Author: Anand Byrareddy E IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 03″) DAY oF JUNE we BEFORE THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE 7 WRIT PETITION No.-‘2;z771 orszoos I B ETWEEN : Shrir. Mudalagirigowda, S\/0 Thimmegowda, Aged 55 […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-244498","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nMudalagirigowda S\/O Thimmegowda vs The Chief Engineer (E) on 3 June, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mudalagirigowda-so-thimmegowda-vs-the-chief-engineer-e-on-3-june-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Mudalagirigowda S\/O Thimmegowda vs The Chief Engineer (E) on 3 June, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mudalagirigowda-so-thimmegowda-vs-the-chief-engineer-e-on-3-june-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2011-06-02T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-09-22T21:20:50+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mudalagirigowda-so-thimmegowda-vs-the-chief-engineer-e-on-3-june-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mudalagirigowda-so-thimmegowda-vs-the-chief-engineer-e-on-3-june-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Mudalagirigowda S\\\/O Thimmegowda vs The Chief Engineer (E) on 3 June, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-06-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-09-22T21:20:50+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mudalagirigowda-so-thimmegowda-vs-the-chief-engineer-e-on-3-june-2011\"},\"wordCount\":1799,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mudalagirigowda-so-thimmegowda-vs-the-chief-engineer-e-on-3-june-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mudalagirigowda-so-thimmegowda-vs-the-chief-engineer-e-on-3-june-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mudalagirigowda-so-thimmegowda-vs-the-chief-engineer-e-on-3-june-2011\",\"name\":\"Mudalagirigowda S\\\/O Thimmegowda vs The Chief Engineer (E) on 3 June, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-06-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-09-22T21:20:50+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mudalagirigowda-so-thimmegowda-vs-the-chief-engineer-e-on-3-june-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mudalagirigowda-so-thimmegowda-vs-the-chief-engineer-e-on-3-june-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mudalagirigowda-so-thimmegowda-vs-the-chief-engineer-e-on-3-june-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Mudalagirigowda S\\\/O Thimmegowda vs The Chief Engineer (E) on 3 June, 2011\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Mudalagirigowda S\/O Thimmegowda vs The Chief Engineer (E) on 3 June, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mudalagirigowda-so-thimmegowda-vs-the-chief-engineer-e-on-3-june-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Mudalagirigowda S\/O Thimmegowda vs The Chief Engineer (E) on 3 June, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mudalagirigowda-so-thimmegowda-vs-the-chief-engineer-e-on-3-june-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-06-02T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-09-22T21:20:50+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mudalagirigowda-so-thimmegowda-vs-the-chief-engineer-e-on-3-june-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mudalagirigowda-so-thimmegowda-vs-the-chief-engineer-e-on-3-june-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Mudalagirigowda S\/O Thimmegowda vs The Chief Engineer (E) on 3 June, 2011","datePublished":"2011-06-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-09-22T21:20:50+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mudalagirigowda-so-thimmegowda-vs-the-chief-engineer-e-on-3-june-2011"},"wordCount":1799,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mudalagirigowda-so-thimmegowda-vs-the-chief-engineer-e-on-3-june-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mudalagirigowda-so-thimmegowda-vs-the-chief-engineer-e-on-3-june-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mudalagirigowda-so-thimmegowda-vs-the-chief-engineer-e-on-3-june-2011","name":"Mudalagirigowda S\/O Thimmegowda vs The Chief Engineer (E) on 3 June, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-06-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-09-22T21:20:50+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mudalagirigowda-so-thimmegowda-vs-the-chief-engineer-e-on-3-june-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mudalagirigowda-so-thimmegowda-vs-the-chief-engineer-e-on-3-june-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mudalagirigowda-so-thimmegowda-vs-the-chief-engineer-e-on-3-june-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Mudalagirigowda S\/O Thimmegowda vs The Chief Engineer (E) on 3 June, 2011"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/244498","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=244498"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/244498\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=244498"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=244498"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=244498"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}