LAWS(SC)-2013-9-105

DAVALSAB HUSAINSAB MULLA Vs. NORTH WEST KARNATAKA

Decided On September 24, 2013
Davalsab Husainsab Mulla Appellant
V/S
North West Karnataka Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) This appeal is directed against the judgment of the Division Bench of Karnataka High Court dated 13.08.2009 passed in Writ Appeal No. 5040 of 2008 and Writ Appeal No. 2499 of 2007. By the common judgment, the Division Bench, while setting aside the order of the learned Single Judge reducing the quantum of punishment imposed on the Appellant, upheld the order of dismissal passed by the Respondent-Corporation. In this appeal the challenge is to the order passed in Writ Appeal No. 2499 of 2007.

(3.) Shorn of unnecessary details, the case of the Appellant was that he was working as a driver in the Respondent Corporation and that on 30.11.1995, he was travelling in the Corporation bus without ticket which was detected by the checking squad. The checking squad imposed the usual penalty on the Appellant. It is stated that enraged by the action of the checking squad, the Appellant abused the Checking Inspector by using filthy language and also threatened to do away with his life. The Appellant also stated to have attempted to assault the Checking Inspector. Subsequently, he is stated to have approached the coordinator in the Divisional Office Belgaum and behaved in an arrogant manner with the said officer. Apart from abusing the officials of the checking squad in filthy language in the presence of other employees, he is also stated to have thrown a challenge that he would close the gate of the office and indulge in Satyagraha. Again on the next day i.e. on 01.12.1995, he is sated to have entered the Divisional Line checking section and threatened the Checking Inspector by stating that he would burn him in the presence of other officials and the employees. A joint report was submitted by those employees based on which a charge sheet was issued to the Appellant calling for his explanation. The Appellant while denying the charges replied that penalty was collected from him by Checking Inspector and that he went to the office of the coordinator only to report about what had happened when the checking squad intercepted him when he was travelling in the bus.