KARNATAKA TRADE UNION CENTRE Vs. GOVT OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A registered Trade Union has filed this petition by way of public interest against the State of Karnataka, Lokayukta and three other officials of Karnataka Soaps and Detergents Ltd. , seeking for a direction to the Central Bureau of Investigation for investigating the alleged mis-appropriation, misdeeds, and mismanagement committed by the respondents 4 to 6 (officials of the Company) on the basis of a complaint filed by the petitioner herein. An additional direction is also sought for a further investigation by the Karnataka Lokayukta in addition to other prayers.

(2.) PETITIONER states that the petitioner is taking keen interest in the growth of Industries in the State of Karnataka. The Karnataka Soaps and Detergents Ltd. (KSDL) had entrusted the Security system on the basis of yearly contract to one M/s. Federal Intelligence and Security Bureau on certain mutual agreed terms between the parties. The 4th respondent later called for tenders in September, 1998 for security system and there were twelve Security Agencies who participated in the tender contract. Finally the said tender had been allotted to EDA Associates, Bangalore in an illegal manner. Petitioner filed a complaint against the grant of security system to EDA by accusing the respondents 4 to 6 of various misdeeds before Lokayukta. Lokayukta sought for objections from respondents 4 to 6 after investigation and thereafter issued an endorsement as per annexure G. Thereafter the petitioner also sought for prosecution of respondents 4 to 6 for misappropriation in the matter of awarding contract. Subsequently the matter was taken before the Chief Minister by way of representation. Now the Lokayukta has issued an endorsement on 29-5-2000 after investigation closing the case u/s. 9 (6) of Karnataka Lokayukta Act (for Short Act ). According to the petition averments respondent 3 without going into all the contentions raised by the petitioner and having hand in glove with respondents 4 to 6 deliberately closed the matter without any explanation. In these circumstances the petitioner seeks for prayer for referring the matter of CBI and for further investigation by respondent 3.

(3.) WE have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner at length.