IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2021

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. VEERAPPA

AND

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

WRIT PETITION No.46331/2016(S-CAT)

BETWEEN:

SRI. SUNDAR RAJ

S/O. LATE MUTTUSWAMI,

AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,

EX.SSG-1, (WATCHMAN),

CHES, CHETHALLI, MADIKERE TALUK,

KODAGU DISTRICT-541 430.

...PETITIONER

(BY SRI SRINIVAS V., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 .

INDIAN COUNCIL OF AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH

KRISHI BHAVAN,

NEW DELHI-110 001,

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY &

APPELLATE AUTHORITY.

2 .

THE DIRECTOR AND DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY

INDIAN INSTITUTE OF HORTICULTURAL

RESEARCH (IIHR),

HESARGHATTA LAKE POST,

BANGALORE-560 089.

2

3 .

THE UNION OF INDIA

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE,

KRISHI BHAVAN,

NEW DELHI-110 001.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI BASAVARAJ PUJAR S., CENTRAL GOVERNMENT COUNSEL

FOR R1 AND R3;

SRI B.A. CHANDRASHEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

*****

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND

227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE

ORDER DATED 28.09.2011 PASSED BY CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE

TRIBUNAL AT BANGALORE IN OA No.388/2011 VIDE ANNEXURE A

TO THE WRIT PETITION AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE OA

No.388/2011 FILED BY THIS PETITIONER AND GRANT THE RELIEF

AS PRAYED FOR IN THE OA.

THIS WRIT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS

DAY, B.VEERAPPA, J, MADE THE FOLLOWING:

O R D E R

The

petitioner,

being

unsuccessful

before

the

Central

Administrative Tribunal, filed the present Writ Petition challenging

the Order dated 28.09.2011 passed in Original Application

No.388/2011, dismissing the application filed by the petitioner/

applicant challenging the Order dated 26/30.03.2007 passed by the

respondents removing him from service as SSG-I (Watchman) at

CHES, Chethalli.

3

2.

For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per

their ranking before the Central Administrative Tribunal.

3.

The petitioner/applicant filed O.A.No.388/2011 before the

Central Administrative Tribunal challenging the Order dated

26/30.03.2007 passed by the respondents removing him from

service, contending that the applicant was appointed as casual

labour (TS) in the 2^nd respondent – Indian Institute of Horticultural

Research (IIHR) to the post of SSG-1 (watchman) at Chethalli,

office of IIHR, with effect from 13.11.2001. The second respondent

issued the terms and conditions and also intimated the petitioner to

report for duty as per the Memorandum dated 08.11.2001 and

since then, he has been working as such and discharging his duties.

Subsequently,

by

the

Order

dated

27.10.2006,

on

the

recommendations of the Departmental Promotion Committee, the

2^nd respondent declared that the petitioner has successfully

completed the probationary period on 12.11.2003 and gave

substantive appointment with effect from 13.11.2003.

4.

When things stood thus, alleging that the petitioner/applicant

planted explosives at CHES, Chethalli campus, with a malafide

4

intention to catch wild pigs and rabbits for personal use and expose

the property of the station and life of staff members at a high risk

due to explosion, the respondents issued Articles of Charge dated

19.05.2006, to the effect that:

(i) The applicant, while working as SS-I (Watchman)

at CHES, Chethalli, planted explosives in the

night of 14.03.2006 at CHES, Chethalli campus

with a malafide intention of catching wild pigs

and rabbits for personal use. During this time,

he had exposed the property of the station and

lives of staff members at a high risk due to

explosion

and

thereby,

exhibited

misconduct/misbehaviour, thus unbecoming of a

Council’s Servant, in violation of Sub-Rule (i)(ii)

and (iii) of Rule 3 of Central Civil Services

(Conduct) Rules, 1964.

(ii) While working as SSG-I (watchman) at CHES,

Chethalli, the applicant was allotted Type-1

quarters in the stat