R. PATHANNA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of certiorari to quash the impugned letter (Annexure-L) bearing No.Administration (1)34/CGO /2018-19 dtd. 9/8/2021 addressed to the 1st respondent by the 2nd respondent, wherein the 2nd respondent has recommended to remove the petitioner from the post of Home Guards Commandant.

(2.) Heard Sri Chandrakanth R. Goulay learned counsel for Sri Raghavendra H.S. learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Sandesh Kumar M, learned HCGP for respondents 1 to 4. Perused the writ petition papers.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that petitioner is presently working as Home Guards District Commandant of Tumkur District. By notification (Annexure-A) dtd. 11/7/2019 the petitioner was appointed as Home Guards District Commandant for a period of five years or until further orders, whichever is earlier. It is his submission that Annexure-C complaint dtd. 6/1/2021 was submitted against the petitioner and the said complaint was forwarded to the 3rd respondent-Superintendent of Police, Tumkur District. On verification, the 3rd respondent under Annexure-E dtd. 6/4/2021 communicated that no complaint is received against the petitioner. In that regard, petitioner also refers to Annexures-F, G and H dtd. 8/4/2021, 8/4/2021 and 15/4/2021. The Deputy Superintendent of Police under Annexure-H dtd. 15/4/2021 intimated the 3rd respondent that the work of the petitioner as Home Guards District Commandant is not satisfactory. Based on the communication of the Deputy Commissioner the 2nd respondent under impugned letter dtd. 9/8/2021 Annexure L recommended to the 1st respondent to take action against the petitioner and to remove the petitioner from the post of Home Guards District Commandant.