Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
R.NATARAJ
Vijayakrishna, S/o. Narayanappa – Appellant
Versus
State Of Karnataka, By Its Secretary – Respondent
ORDER :
R. NATARAJ, J.
This petition was dismissed for non-prosecution on 18.08.2023 in so far as petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are concerned. In so far as petitioner No.1, this petition was dismissed for non- prosecution on 05.02.2025. It is only petitioner No.1, who had filed application for recalling the order dismissing the petition for non-prosecution and accordingly, the petition was restored in so far as petitioner No.1 is concerned. This order is therefore applicable only to petitioner No.1 and not petitioner Nos.2 and 3.
2. The petitioner No.1 has challenged the order dated 14.06.2016 passed by respondent No.2 in HRC Nos.6510/2011 and 4235/2013 as well as the order dated 02.02.2017 passed by respondent No.5 in Case No.73/GC/SHRC/2016 O.B. No.01/2017.
3. (i) The gravamen of the case of the petitioner No.1 was that respondent No.3 had lodged a complaint against petitioner Nos.2 and 3 accusing them of assaulting him. It was alleged that the petitioner No.1 who was the Station House Officer failed to register the complaint lodged by respondent No.3. It was also the case of the respondent No.3 that a counter complaint lodged by petitioner Nos.2 and 3 against him and others was entertained
The failure to provide an enquiry report to a party constitutes a violation of natural justice, warranting nullification of decisions made without their input.
Allegations of human rights violations must be substantiated by evidence; mere claims without corroboration do not establish a violation.
Disciplinary proceedings must adhere to principles of natural justice, including communication of inquiry reports and provision for cross-examination, to ensure fairness and validity.
It is a duty of Inquiry Officer to scan entire evidence in order to arrive at a finding after judging case of all the parties, adhering to the principles of natural justice, otherwise, inquiry is vit....
The NHRC lacked jurisdiction to act on the complaint due to the one-year limitation under Section 36(2) of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, and failed to provide due process to the petitione....
The NHRC lacked jurisdiction to take cognizance of the complaint beyond the limitation period specified in the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993.
The non-supply of the enquiry report and lack of opportunity to respond to it constitutes a violation of natural justice, rendering the punishment order unsustainable.
The principles of natural justice require that a delinquent employee be given a copy of the preliminary enquiry report before the disciplinary authority arrives at its conclusions with regard to the ....
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
