(1.) The petitioner has filed this petition impugning the order dated 14.5.2019 in a pending enquiry in No.LOK/INQ/274/2013/ARE-7 before the second respondent.
(2.) The petitioner's case is that because of certain complaints of corruption, the respondents not only laid charge sheet for the offence punishable under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) read with 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act , 1988 but the competent authority also entrusted the departmental enquiry under Rule 14(A) of the Karnataka Civil Services (CCA) Rules, 1957 (for short, 'KCS (CCA) Rules'. The criminal proceeding in Special Case No.20/2012 is concluded in favour of the petitioner with the petitioner being acquitted of the offences. The petitioner, upon such acquittal, has filed an application for closure of the enquiry entrusted under Rule 14(A) of the KCS (CCA) Rules. The second respondent rejecting such application by the impugned order has concluded that the acquittal in the criminal proceedings would not ipso facto absolve the petitioner of the consequences in a departmental proceedings for misconduct and significantly, the departmental enquiry proceedings cannot be truncated midcourse merely because of the acquittal in the criminal proceedings. The second respondent has also reasoned that the application for closure of the proceedings is filed belatedly with 'written brief' submitted being under consideration in the enquiry.
(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is acquitted in the criminal proceedings because the complainant and other material witnesses turned hostile and these are the very same witnesses who are cited as witnesses in the enquiry. These witnesses will have to reiterate their testimony before the criminal Court and as such, no purpose would be served in continuing the departmental enquiry proceedings. Therefore, the application for closure of the proceedings is well made and the same should have been favourably considered by the second respondent.