Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Krishna S. Dixit, J.
Ramalinge Gowda - Appellant
Versus
District Registrar / Deputy Registrar Of Co-operative Societes, Mandya District, Mandya & Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition No. 16106 of 2022 (GM-KSR)
Decided On : 13-09-2022
Enquiry - Delay in Enquiry Completion - The court directed the State Government to hold a disciplinary enquiry against the predecessors in office responsible for the delay in completing the enquiry despite the direction of the Co-ordinate Bench of the Court. The petitioner was given the option to seek revival of the petition and impose costs on the erring officials if the enquiry was not completed within eight weeks.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner raised grievance against the long pendency of an enquiry despite a previous case directing the completion of the enquiry in a time-bound manner. The court noted the delay and directed the State Government to hold a disciplinary enquiry against the responsible officials.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that there was a delay in completing the enquiry due to a communication gap between the successor officer and his predecessors. The court disposed off the writ petition as infructuous and directed the State Government to hold disciplinary enquiry against the responsible officials. The petitioner was given the option to seek revival of the petition if the enquiry was not completed within eight weeks.
Issues: Delay in completing the enquiry, responsibility of the officials, revival of the petition, imposition of costs on erring officials.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the delay in completing the enquiry was due to a communication gap between the successor officer and his predecessors. The court directed the State Government to hold disciplinary enquiry against the responsible officials and allowed the petitioner to seek revival of the petition if the enquiry was not completed within eight weeks.
Final Decision: The writ petition was disposed off as infructuous. The State Government was directed to hold disciplinary enquiry against the responsible officials, and the petitioner was given the option to seek revival of the petition if the enquiry was not completed within eight weeks.
JUDGMENT
Krishna S.Dixit, J. - The grievance of the petitioner is against the long pendency of enquiry in question despite his earlier case in W.P.No.46503/2017 disposed off on 27.09.2018 had directed accomplishment of the enquiry in a time bound way. This Court at the admission stage on 03.09.2022 had said as under:
"Despite a direction by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in WP No.46503/2017 disposed off on 27.09.2018, the proceedings are still kept pending and this conduct on the part of the officer concerned arguably borders contempt of Court. Therefore, officer concerned i.e., respondent No.1 shall be present before the Court on 13.09.2022.
However, in the meanwhile if proceedings are accomplished his presence shall not be required."
2. Learned AGA appearing for the official respondents submits that though there is some delay in accomplishing enquiry that happened because of a communication gap between the successor officer and his predecessors and therefore, the same may be condoned. She also places on record the enquiry report after serving a copy thereof on learned counsel for the petitioner. In view of the above, writ petition has become infructuous and accordingly is disposed off. The respondent-State Government is directed to hold disciplinary enquiry against said predecessors in office who are responsible for brooking enormous delay despite direction of Co-ordinate Bench of this Court.
3. The enquiry had to be completed within an outer limit of eight weeks, failing which, it is open to the petitioner to seek revival of the petition so that this Court can impose some cost on the erring officials. An enquiry report shall be submitted to the Registrar General after completion of above task. Costs made easy.
The court has the authority to direct the State Government to hold disciplinary enquiry against officials responsible for delay in completing an enquiry, and the petitioner has the option to seek rev....
The Court accepted delays in inquiry proceedings due to administrative challenges, granting an extension to comply with previous mandatory directions.
The court emphasized the need to balance the need for expeditious proceedings with fairness towards the employee in disciplinary proceedings.
Departmental inquiries must adhere to statutory timelines. Delays due to non-supply of documents are unacceptable, ensuring due process and expediting disciplinary actions.
Delay in disciplinary enquiry does not automatically invalidate proceedings; courts have discretion to extend time for completion.
The main legal point established is that conducting a denovo enquiry solely due to the Disciplinary Authority's disagreement with the Enquiry Officer's findings is impermissible. Additionally, the pr....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
