Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD BENCH
VIBHU BAKHRU, C.M.POONACHA
Dadapeer Bhanuvalli S/o Shabbir Ahmed – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent
ORDER :
1. The present writ petition is filed by the petitioner who was the applicant before the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal [Hereinafter referred to as ‘KSAT’] calling in question the order dated 27.09.2021 passed in application No.1604/2019, whereunder the Tribunal dismissed the application filed by the petitioner.
2. The relevant facts in a nutshell leading to present petition are that the respondent No.2-Director of Department of Prosecutions, State of Karnataka issued a Notification on 16.05.2012 to fill up 197 Posts of Assistant Public Prosecutors [Hereinafter referred to as ‘APP’] cum Government Pleaders [Hereinafter referred to as ‘GP’]. The petitioner having made an application pursuant to the said Notification was selected and appointed to the post of APP cum Assistant Government Pleader [Hereinafter referred to as ‘AGP’] on 17.06.2014 and he reported for duty on 30.06.2014. By order dated 28.10.2016, the probationary period of the petitioner was declared as satisfactory.
3. When things stood thus, pursuant to a private complaint, the Lokayukta Police registered an FIR in Crime No.59/2014 and the (alleged) irregularities committed in the selection process was inv
The court upheld the Lokayukta's jurisdiction to investigate recruitment irregularities, clarifying that previous actions can impact public servants under statutory provisions.
The Lokayukta has no jurisdiction to investigate matters relating to the disciplinary actions of public servants as stipulated in Section 8 of the Karnataka Lokayukta Act.
The State Government did not have the jurisdiction to entrust the inquiry to the Lokayukta under Rule 14-A of the CCA Rules because the petitioners were not Government servants within the meaning of ....
The government has the authority to refer corruption cases for investigation by the Lokayukta even if departmental inquiries are in progress, ensuring comprehensive enforcement of anti-corruption law....
Demotion of a civil servant lacks basis if educational qualifications are met at the time of regularization; Lokayuktha investigation scope does not cover recruitment inaccuracies.
Point of law : Report of the Upa-lokayuktha cannot be said to be without jurisdiction and the report made therein by itself does not affect any legal right on the petitioner therein. The action of th....
The Lokayukta lacks jurisdiction to investigate complaints regarding public servant appointments, which are excluded under the Uttar Pradesh Lokayukta Act, 1975.
The Government is the sole disciplinary authority competent to impose penalties following an enquiry by the Lokayukta or Upa-Lokayukta under the Karnataka CCA Rules, 1957.
Compliance with statutory procedures is mandatory; failure to adhere to outlined procedures vitiates legal proceedings and investigations.
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
