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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 105

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
D K SINGH AND S RACHAIAH
SRI P MARUTHI – Appellant
Versus
THE MISSION DIRECTOR – Respondent
WA 1707/2024



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH

AND

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

WRIT APPEAL NO. 1707 OF 2024 (S-DIS)

BETWEEN:

1. SRI. P MARUTHI

AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,

S/O PUTTASWAMY,

WORKING AS DISTRICT ACCOUNTS MANAGER,

OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT HEALTH OFFICER,

NO.207, 2ND FLOOR,

DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDING,

CHAPPARAKALLU,

BEERASANDRA VILLAGE,

DEVANAHALLI TALUK,

BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT – 562 110.

Digitally RESIDING AT 2ND B LINK ROAD,

signed by

2ND CROSS, SREEDHARAN

BANGALORE TUMKUR TALUK,

SUSHMA

LAKSHMI TUMKUR DISTRICT – 572 102.

Location: High

Court of

Karnataka …APPELLANT

(BY SRI. MUKKANNAPPA S B, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE MISSION DIRECTOR NATIONAL HEALTH MISSION,

KARNATAKA,

1ST FLOOR,

MAGADI ROAD,

BENGALURU – 560 021.

2. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER ZILLA PANCHAYATH, DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDING, CHAPPARAKALLU, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT – 562 110.

3. THE DISTRICT HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE OFFICER NO.207, 2ND FLOOR, DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDING, CHAPPARAKALLU, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT – 562 110.

4. THE DISTRICT REPRODUCTIVE AND CHILD HEALTH OFFICER DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDING, CHAPPARAKALLU, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT – 562 110.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MOHAMMAD JAFFAR SHAH, AGA FOR R1;

SRI. M S DEVARAJU, ADVOCATE FOR R2 – R4)

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 21/09/2024 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WP NO.20862/2024 AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE WRIT PETITION NO.20862/2024 AND ETC., THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH)

1. The present appeal has been filed by the appellant impugning the judgment and order dated 21.09.2024 passed in W.P. No. 20862/2024.

2. The parties are referred to as per their ranking in the petition for the sake of convenience.

3. The petitioner had filed a petition challenging the order dated 07.06.2024 passed by the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Panchayath, District Administrative Building, Bangalore Rural District and consequent order dated 18.07.2024 passed by the District Health and Family Welfare Officer whereby the petitioner's contractual employment which was initially for a period of four months i.e., up to 31.03.2019, came to be terminated and his services discontinued.

4. The petitioner was given the contractual appointment as District Accounts Manager for Bangalore Rural district in the National Health Mission. The initial appointment of the petitioner was only for a period of four months. It was valid upto 31.03.2019. The petitioner was issued a notice dated 29.02.2024 for non-payment of certain bills. He submitted his reply on 01.03.2024 contending that the delay, if any was not attributable to him, but he had forwarded it to the next authority. He also submitted that mistake if any, committed by him would not be repeated in future.

5. But following the said reply to the notice, the petitioner was issued another notice on 06.03.2024 stating that the petitioner's reply was not found satisfactory and the petitioner was given 3 more days time to file his better reply. The petitioner again submitted his reply on 13.03.2024 contending that the bills were sent for counter signature to the higher officers. However, the same were not returned to him. He said that as soon as the bills were received by him, he had sent the same within 24 hours to the accounts division. It was his claim that the petitioner was not the competent authority to sanction the bills and therefore, there was no delay on his part. The petitioner contended that without considering the reply submitted by him, respondent No. 2 had passed an order on 07.06.2024 whereby the petitioner's services had discontinued. Following the said order dated 07.06.2024, The District Health and Family W

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