Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
JAYANT BANERJI, S.G. PANDIT
T.S. Shivaramu S/o Shivalingaiah – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background of disciplinary actions against the petitioner. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. petitioner's argument against re-enquiry process. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. government's defense for investigation referral. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. details of the investigation orders issued. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 5. discussion on relevant laws and procedures. (Para 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 6. interpretation of rule 14-a regarding disciplinary proceedings. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 7. court's view on the completeness of enquiry process. (Para 21 , 22) |
| 8. conclusion to dismiss the petition. (Para 23 , 24) |
1. Heard learned counsel Sri. Satish K., for petitioner, learned Additional Government Advocate Sri.B.Ravindranath appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and learned counsel Sri.Venkatesh S. Arbatti for respondent No.3.
2. Under challenge in the instant petition is an order dated 20.03.2023 passed in Application No.1883/2022 by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal at Bengaluru, whereby, the application of the petitioner that was filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking quashing of orders dated 16.04.2022 and 12.05.2022 passed by respondent No.1, has been dismissed. On 16.04.2022, t
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....
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.
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 court upheld the Lokayukta's jurisdiction to investigate recruitment irregularities, clarifying that previous actions can impact public servants under statutory provisions.
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....
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....
Disciplinary proceedings cannot be initiated without prima facie evidence of misconduct, as established by the Tribunal's ruling that the entrustment order lacked sufficient material.
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
