IMPORTANT POINT
Natural justice requires a proper hearing and framing of charges before removal from a position, especially when serious allegations are involved.

JUDGMENT :

N. V. ANJARIA, C.J.

Heard learned Senior Advocate Mr. Vivek Reddy with learned Senior Advocate Mr. M. Shivaprakash assisted by learned Advocate Mr. Anand Sanjay M Nuli, for the petitioner, learned Advocate General Mr. Shashi Kiran Shetty with learned Government Advocate Mr. S.S. Mahendra, for respondent No.4-the State and its authorities, and learned Advocate Mr. Mahesh Choudhary for respondent No.5-Karnataka State Pollution Control Board, at length.

The Challenge

2. The petitioner, by filing the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, has prayed to set aside Notification dated 31st May 2024 issued by the competent authority, Department of Forest and Environment, further to allow the petitioner to discharge duties as Chairman and Technical Person of respondent No.5-Karnataka State Pollution Control Board.

2.1 By the aforementioned Notification issued under Section 6(1)(g) of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, the petitioner, who was the Chairman of the respondent No.5-Board came to be disqualified as a Member of the Board and consequently dismissed from the position of the Chairman.

Basic Facts

3. The petitioner who possessed B.Tech degree in Mining and Mineral, M.Tech degree in Industrial Pollution Control and also Ph.D degree holder in ‘Socio-economic and Environmental Impact Studies’, has by filing the instant petition, complained about the arbitrary removal from the post of Chairman of the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board, in stigmatic manner.

3.1 Pursuant to Notification dated 21st May 2020, inviting applications for the post of Chairman, Karnataka State Pollution Control Board, the Search-cum-Selection Committee found the petitioner most eligible candidate out of 106 applications received. The Search-cum-Selection Committee comprised of Hon’ble the Chief Minister of State of Karnataka as its Chairman, Hon’ble Minister for Forest and Ecology as Vice-Chairman and Member of the Committee the Chief Secretary of the Government of Karnataka. The petitioner was nominated for the post of Chairman of the State Pollution Control Board on 11th September 2021 and came to be appointed as Chairman under Notification dated 15th November 2021. His appointment under the said Notification was for three years to last upto 14th November 2024.

3.1.1 It is the case of the petitioner, in view of the elections held in the year 2023, on 15th May 2023, new Government in the State of Karnataka came to power. On 15th July 2023, a show case notice came to be issued to the petitioner. Thereafter, a Corrigendum dated 31st August 2023 was issued to provide that his tenure would complete on 4th March 2023, which was after 1 year 5 months and 27 days instead of upto 14th November 2024, as provided in the original Notification. The Principal Secretary of the Government was put in charge of the post of the Chairman.

Tenure till 14.11.2024

3.2 At this stage, writ petitions connected with the subject of appointment of the petitioner came to be filed. Amongst the several petitions, Writ Petition No.23417 of 2023 was filed by the petitioner to challenge the initiation of enquiry pursuant to show cause notice dated 15th July 2023, whereas Writ Petition No.19569 of 2023 came to be filed by the petitioner to challenge Corrigendum dated 31st August 2023, whereby the tenure of the petitioner as Chairman of the Board was curtailed as above.

3.2.1 All the petitions were heard and disposed of together by Division Bench of this Court. Writ Petition No.23417 of 2023 whereby communication dated 26th July 2023 initiating enquiry was challenged, was not entertained by the court and the inquiry was directed to be completed in accordance with law. Writ petition No.19567 of 2023 in which the petitioner had called in question the Notification/ Corrigendum dated 31st August 2023, was allowed as per common judgment dated 29th November 2023, by setting aside the Corrigendum. It was observed that, as a consequence, the tenure of the pe