SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 39270

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
ASHOK S.KINAGI
DR K C JAYASWAMY – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
WP 21700/2023



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI WRIT PETITION NO. 21700 OF 2023 (S-RES)

BETWEEN:

DR K C JAYASWAMY AGED 60 YEARS, S/O C CHANNAIAH, RETIRED AS PRINCIPAL O/O SRI SIDDAGANGA COLLEGE OF ARTS, SCIENCE AND COMMERCE, FOR WOMEN, TUMKUR, B H ROAD, R/A HONALU, 7TH MAIN ROAD, VALMIKI NAGAR, TUMKUR 572103.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHIVARUDRAPPA N.B, ADVOCATE)

Digit ally signed by SUNITHA K S AND:

Location:

HIGH COURT 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA OF REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY KARNATAKA HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560001

2. THE COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF COLLEGIATE AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION, GOVT. OF KARNATAKA SHESHADRI ROAD, BENGALURU - 560001.

3. THE JOINT DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, GOVT. OF KARNATAKA KALIDASA MARG, GANDHINAGAR BENGALURU - 560001

4. THE PRESIDENT SREE SIDDAGANGA EDUCATION SOCIETY (R)

SIDDAGANGA MUTT, KYATHSANDRA TUMKUR - 572104. 5. THE PRINCIPAL SREE SIDDAGANGA COLLEGE OF ARTS, SCIENCE AND COMMERCE FOR WOMEN BH ROAD, TUMKUR - 572102.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. B. SUKANYA BALIGA, AGA FOR R1 TO R3 SRI. POONAM PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R4 & R5)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OF QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET DATED 19/08/2023 ORDER BEARING NO. SSES 1544/2023-24 (ANNEXURE-L) AND ALL OTHER FURTHER PROCEEDINGS IN PURSUANCE OF THE CHARGE SHEET. b) DECLARE THAT INITIATION OF A DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AFTER THE RETIREMENT IS WITHOUT JURISDICTION AND THE SAME IS IN VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. C) DECLARE THAT THE RIGHT TO INITIATE THE DISCIPLINARY ACTION OR RIGHT TO CONTINUE THE DISCIPLINARY ACTION AFTER THE RETIREMENT HAS NOT BEEN RESERVED BY THE MANAGEMENT IN THE RELIVING ORDER DATED 29/04/2023 BEARING NO. SSCW.36/2023-24 (ANNEXURE-K) AND ISSUANCE OF THE FRESH ARTICLES OF CHARGES AFTER THE RETIREMENT IS ILLEGAL AND WITHOUT JURISDICTION AND THE SAME IS LIABLE TO BE DECLARED AS ARBITRARY AND VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLE 14, 16 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND ETC.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner filed this petition seeking for the following reliefs:

"a) Issue a Writ of Certiorari to quash the charge sheet dated 19.08.2023 order bearing No. SSES 1544/2023-24 (Annexure-L) and all other further proceedings in pursuance of the chargesheet.

b) Declare that initiation of a disciplinary proceedings after the retirement is without jurisdiction and the same is in violation of principles of natural justice.

c) Declare that the right to initiate the disciplinary action or right to continue the disciplinary action after the retirement has not been reserved by the management in in the reliving order dated 29.04.2023 bearing No. SSCW: 36/2023-24 (Annexure-K) and issuance of the fresh articles of charges after the retirement is illegal and without jurisdiction and the same is liable to be declared as arbitrary and violative of Article 14, 16 of the Constitution of India.

d) Direct the respondents to fix the pension and pay the retiremental benefits.

e) Pass any appropriate direction or order as deemed fit by this Hon'ble Court in the circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity."

2. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this petition are as follows:

2.1. The petitioner, who served as a Lecturer in the Commerce department and rose through the ranks to become the Principal of the college, faces a disciplinary action initiated by the management after retirement. The allegations were primarily revolved around the collection of development charges during COVID-19 pandemic, with the petitioner contending adherence to the Government directives that permitted only the authorized fees. The petitioner, while acknowledging the notices and responding to them, asserted that there was no misappropriation

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top