Back
2025 Supreme(Kar) 386
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
R.DEVDAS, K.V. ARAVIND, JJ.
The State Of Karnataka - Appellant
Versus
M. Iliyas S/o. Ibrahimsab Sarpanch - Respondent
WA No.100628 of 2017 C/W WP No.102913 of 2018
Decided on : 16-06-2025
Important Points
Subject
Administrative Law - Employment Law
Act Referred
Headnote
(B) Administrative action - Scope of Lokayuktha - The investigation remit of the Lokayuktha does not extend to recruitment matters where allegations concern historical qualifications not impacting current administrative operations. (Paras 14, 19)
Facts of the case:
The respondent was appointed Junior Engineer; upon a complaint, he was demoted as he allegedly lacked qualifications. The dispute arose after a series of actions culminating in a Writ Appeal by the state questioning the legality of this demotion.
Findings of Court:
The Chief Executive Officer's demotion order was flawed as the respondent possessed the necessary qualifications when regularized, thus the respondent's position should remain unchanged.
Issues: Whether the respondent had the requisite qualifications at the time of his appointment and the propriety of the demotion initiated by the state action.
Ratio Decidendi: The qualifications were adequately met upon regularization, and actions were prohibited from being taken against the respondent due to historical qualifications.
Result: Writ Appeal dismissed; Writ Petition allowed.
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : SRI. T. HANUMAREDDY, AGA
For the Respondent:SRI. MRUTYUNJAYA S. HALLIKERI, ADVOCATE, SRI. BHUSHAN B. KULKARNI, ADVOCATE
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of the joined cases (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. background of respondent's employment and demotion (Para 3 , 4 , 6) |
| 3. details surrounding qualifications and regulations (Para 5 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. interpretation of the karnataka lokayuktha act (Para 12 , 14 , 16) |
| 5. court's findings on administrative actions (Para 13 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 6. order and conclusion of the court (Para 20) |
JUDGMENT :
R.DEVDAS, J.
Since we are dealing with a Writ Appeal filed at the hands of the State Government and a Writ Petition filed by the respondent in the Writ Appeal and the grievance in both the cases arise from an action sought to be taken by the State as against the respondent, both these cases are clubbed, heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.
2. The brief background is required to be given to understand as to why and how these two cases have come up for consideration before this Court. For the sake of convenience we will address the parties as ‘the appellant- State of Karnataka’ and ‘the respondent-Mr. M. Iliyas’.
3. The respondent was appointed as Junior Engineer in the Rural Development and Panchayathraj Department on 01.10.1995, on contract basis. Subsequently on 01.10.2005 his services were regularized. However on a complaint given by the respondent’s cousin brother on 19.02.2014 with the Lokayuktha, the Lokayuktha submitted a report u/S 12(3) of the Karnataka Lokayuktha Act , to the Government, prima facie finding that the allegations against the respondent is that at the time of his appointment in the year 1995 the respondent did not have the requisite educational qualification to be appointed as Junior Engineer. Pursuant thereto an order was passed by the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Panchayat, Koppal, on 25.01.2016 demoting the respondent from the post of Junior Engineer to Second Division Clerk, having regard to the educational qualification, that the respondent had only passed S.S.L.C. and therefore he was eligible to be regularized in the post of Second Division Clerk.
4. The petitioner filed W.P. No. 101343/2016 calling in question the said order dated 25.01.2016 whereby he was demoted to the post of Second Division Clerk. The learned Single Judge found that although it is true that the petitioner had passed S.S.L.C. when he was appointed on contract basis to the post of Junior Engineer, nevertheless the respondent obtained a Diploma Certificate at the hands of the Board of Technical Examination on 28.01.2005. The learned Single Judge held that although it may be true that the petitioner had only S.S.L.C. qualification in the year 1994 when he was appointed on contract basis, nevertheless for more than 24 years the petitioner has served as a Junior Engineer and in the meanwhile he has obtained Diploma Certificate and therefore it would not be just and proper to permit the demotion of the respondent. The State of Karnataka has filed this Writ Appeal questioning the order passed by the learned Single Judge.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent has pointed out that the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Panchayat, who had passed the order of demotion, in fact, is arraigned as respondent in these proceedings at the hands of the State Government.
6. The respondent, in the meanwhile approached the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, being aggrieved of the order of entrustment of enquiry dated 02.07.20116 and the issuance of the Article of Charges dated 07.09.2016. The Tribunal however dismissed the application on the ground that when admittedly the petitioner did not have the requisite qualification to be appointed as Junior Engineer in the year 1995, there is ample material on record to establish acts of fraud and suppression of facts at the hands of the respondent herein. The respondent, aggrieved of the order of rejection of the application at the hands of the Tribunal, has filed W.P. No. 102913/2018.
