Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD
S.G.PANDIT, GEETHA K.B.
Karnataka Lokayukta, R/By Its Registrar – Appellant
Versus
J.S. Tasagaonkar, S/o. Syed Usman – Respondent
ORDER :
S.G.PANDIT, J.
This writ petition is filed by the Lokayukta represented by its Registrar under Article 226 of the Constitution of India questioning the order dated 18.10.2022 in Application No.10294/2020 passed by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal at Belagavi (for short ‘the Tribunal’), wherein, the Tribunal quashed the order of entrustment of enquiry dated 14.05.2019 (Annexure-A5) to the petitioner solely on the ground that the State could not have entrusted the enquiry to the petitioner in respect of a retired employee under Rule 14-A of KCS (CC &A) Rules, 1957. [hereinafter referred to as “CCA Rules”]
2. Heard learned counsel Sri Anil Kale for the petitioner, learned Principal Government Advocate Sri G.K. Hiregoudar for respondent Nos.2 & 3, and learned counsel Sri Satish K. with Sri Suresh Bhat for respondent No.1 and perused the entire writ petition papers.
3. Learned counsel Sri Anil Kale for petitioner would submit that the Tribunal committed an error in quashing the Order dated 14.05.2019 entrusting the enquiry under Rule 14-A of CCA Rules to the petitioner institution on the ground that the State could not have exercised power under Rule 14-A of CCA Rules, to
The court clarified that inquiries against retired government servants can proceed under Rule 214 of KCSR despite Rule 14-A's limitations, affirming the Lokayukta's authority to conduct such inquirie....
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 ....
Disciplinary authority cannot initiate a second inquiry after an initial report exonerates an employee, as per Rule 11A of the Karnataka Civil Services (CCA) Rules.
The court affirmed departmental enquiry legitimacy despite concurrent civil proceedings, emphasizing distinct legal processes for addressing misconduct under statutory rules.
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....
A de novo enquiry against a retired employee is impermissible in law unless permitted by service rules, highlighting the protection of employees' rights post-retirement.
The court ruled that unexplained delays in disciplinary inquiries are unacceptable, emphasizing joint responsibility for timely proceedings.
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.
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
