2016 Supreme(Kar) 614

KARNATAKA HIGH COURT (DB)
Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, K.N. Phaneendra, JJ.
Dr. M. Basappa Reddy - Petitioner
Versus
State of Karnataka and others - Respondents
Writ Petition No. 14770 of 2012 (S-KAT)
Decided On : 01-04-2016

Headnote:KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA ACT, 1984 – Sections 15 & 12 – Investigation- Delegation of powers – Held, The power of referring the matter for investigation or utilize the services of any person or any other agency by Lokayukta is deemed to have been in existence from 1-8-2006 itself. Therefore, whatever the references made or services utilised of any person or any other agency as from 1-8-2006 onwards, those acts of Lokayuktha or Upa-Lokayuktha are validated by way of amendment to the said provision. Therefore, it cannot be said that the Lokayuktha had no jurisdiction to refer the matter to the three-member committee for investigation and report. On receipt of the report under Section 12 (3) of Karnataka Lokayuktha Act, the Government shall examine the report forwarded to get an intimate the action taken or proposed to be taken on the basis of the report. After receipt of the investigation report of the Lokayuktha with recommendations that the Disciplinary action has to be taken against the petitioner, the Government has entrusted the matter to Lokayuktha to conduct Disciplinary Inquiry. The State Government after examining, should take action on the basis of such a report. Therefore, the Government in its wisdom instead of making the inquiry itself has referred the matter to Lokayuktha. There is no legal impediment in doing so.

       LABOUR AND SERVICES – Pension – Withholding, withdrawing or recovery of – Karnataka Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957 – Rule 214 – Permissible if disciplinary proceedings or judicial proceedings are initiated during period when government servant was in service. Enquiry-can be conducted by Disciplinary authority or Government by itself or through such authority as it deems fit and proper.

       MINES AND MINERALS (DEVELOPMENT AND REGULATION) ACT, 1957 – Section 10 – Transportation of minerals – Rights of Pattadar – Merely because Pattadar is owner of property, he cannot transport minerals without obtaining licence for mining and transporting minerals.

       MINES AND MINERALS (DEVELOPMENT AND REGULATION) ACT, 1957 – Section 10 – Illegal transport of minerals- When an officer is vested with the power or authority to do certain acts, he is responsible and answerable to those acts particularly, when such acts need not be in law ratified on by higher-ups. Merely because, the officer has exercised such statutory authority after taking approval or after bringing it to the notice of the superior official or even the Chief Minister, it will not absolve him from his responsibility, because he is the statutory authority to issue such transport permits. The law recognises him as a statutory authority to pass such order or to do such acts. Petition dismissed.

       KARNATAKA CIVIL SERVICES (CLASSIFICATION, CONTROL AND APPEAL) RULES, 1957 – Rule 11 – Investigation by Lokayukta upon reference of case – Powers – Even if the written statement of the delinquent is not considered by the Disciplinary Authority and no articles of charges and statement of imputations were framed by the Disciplinary Authority, the Lokayukta can perform such acts while dealing with the Department of enquiry of the delinquent employee. In view of harmonious reading of Rules 11 and 14-A of the CCA Rules, the Inquiry Officer who is entrusted with the work by the Lokayukta all the Upa-Lokayuktha can definitely frame articles of charges and statement of imputations against the delinquent employee and proceed further to enquire into the matter.

       KARNATAKA CIVIL SERVICES (CLASSIFICATION, CONTROL AND APPEAL) RULES, 1957 – Rules 14-A & 11 – Procedure in cases entrusted to Lokayuktha – When once the entrustment is made, whatever the powers that can be exercised by the Disciplinary Authority will be exercised by the Lokayuktha or the Upa-Lokayuktha or the officer authorized, till the completion of the enquiry and the recommendations are made to the Government. It should also be borne in mind that the wordings 'Inquiring Authority' is not used in the said provision, but the words 'Disciplinary Authority' is specifically used, which has got its own significance. In this background, Rule 11 has to be understood. Rule 11(3) to (23) of the Rules deals with enquiry that has to be conducted by the Disciplinary Authority or other authority to which the entrustment was made to conduct disciplinary enquiry.

       CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 – Order 39, Rule 1 – Temporary injunction – Court is duty bound to consider plaint and written statement before deciding application – Approach adopted by court in deciding application by relying on documents produced by respondent though applicants have disputed their legality, held, improper.

       INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES – Harmonious construction – Provisions that operate on same sphere had to be read jointly – Interpreting provision individually would lead to absurdity.