Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(KAR) 36423
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD, VENKATESH NAIK T, JJ
RAJESH S/O K S/O BASAVARAJ K – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
WP 105960 of 2024
Promotion cannot be denied based on disciplinary proceedings that were not pending at the time of the DPC meeting, reaffirming the necessity of proper procedural adherence.
Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Articles 226 and 227 - Promotion in service - The petitioner challenged the order of the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal which directed completion of departmental enquiry before considering promotion - The court found that no disciplinary proceedings were pending at the time of DPC meeting, thus quashing the Tribunal's order and directing consideration for promotion. (Paras 2, 6, 7)
(B) Sealed Cover Procedure - The court ruled that sealed cover procedure can only be adopted if disciplinary proceedings are pending at the time of DPC meeting, which was not the case here. (Paras 6, 7)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a Warder, was not considered for promotion due to alleged pending disciplinary proceedings which were initiated after the DPC meeting. The Tribunal directed completion of the enquiry before considering promotion.
Findings of Court:
The court allowed the writ petition, set aside the Tribunal's order, and directed consideration for promotion with all consequential benefits.
Issues: The main issue was whether the sealed cover procedure was applicable given the absence of pending disciplinary proceedings at the time of the DPC meeting.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the sealed cover procedure cannot be applied if no disciplinary proceedings were pending at the time of the DPC meeting, reaffirming the principle that promotion should not be denied without proper grounds.
Result: Writ Petition stands allowed.
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD)
This petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 16.08.2023 passed by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, Belagavi in Application No.10199/2023, whereby the application filed by the petitioner was disposed off.
2. Brief facts of the case are that, the petitioner was appointed as Warder in the Prison and Reforms Department on 21.02.2012 and presently, he is working in Central Prison, Ballari. Respondent No.2 published a provisional seniority list of Warders on 20.01.2022, in which, the petitioner’s name is shown at Sl.No.12 of Hyderabad-Karnataka Region list. Based upon the said list, respondent No.2 called for service particulars of Warders, vide Memorandum dated 12.04.2022, who are working in the Residual Parent Cadre and also HK Region, wherein the petitioner’s name is shown at Sl.No.11 of HK Region. On 19.10.2020, the Superintendent of Ballari Prison made a recommendation that there are no disciplinary proceedings pending against the petitioner and he is eligible for promotion. Departmental Promotion Committee
“Accordingly, we dispose this application, with a direction to the 1st respondent to complete the departmental enquiry proceedings which are commenced by issuance of charge memo against the applicant and based on the out-come of the departmental enquiry proceedings, to take a decision regarding considering the case of the applicant for promotion, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. The applicant is also directed to cooperate with the respondents in all stages of the enquiry.”
Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this Court in this petition.
3. Sri.Raghuveer R Sattigeri, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that sealed cover procedure can be adopted and promotion can be denied only if the proceedings are initiated as on the date when DPC considered the claim of promotion. It is submitted that when DPC conducted meeting on 26.08.2022, there was no disciplinary proceedings pending against the petitioner. He also places reliance on judgments of co-ordinate Bench of this Court in WP No.102595/2023, dated 5.10.2023 and WP No.19407/2023, dated 11.07.2024, wherein case of the similarly situated person has been considered and direction has been issued to consider the case of the petitioner therein for promotion.
4. Learned AGA appearing for the respondents/State does not dispute the order passed by co-ordinate Bench of this Court referred to supra, in respect of similarly situated persons.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused writ petition papers.
6. Respondent No.2 published a provisional seniority list of Warders on 20.01.2022. Based on the said list, respondent No.2 called for service particulars of Warders vide Memorandum dated 12.04.2022, who are working in the Residual Paren
