MAHABLESWAR PANDRINATH NAIK Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ petition has come be fore this Division Bench on a reference made by Rama Jois, J., on the ground that this case involves important questions regarding interpretation of Art. 311(2) of the Constitution of India.

(2.) The petitioner Sri M. P. Naik held a civil post under the State Government as Senior Chemist in the Government Sandal Wood Oil Factory. Shimoga. Alleging that he is guilty of certain mis-conduct, certain charges were framed against him and an enquiry was held by the Enquiry Officer appointed for the purpose by the State Government. The Enquiry Officer appears to have submitted his report after conclusion of the enauiry on the 1st of June 1976 1976. Nearly four years thereafter the State Government passed the impugned order on 9.7.80 (Annex- ure-B) holding the petitioner guilty of certain charges and imposing the penalty of rpmoval from service with immediate effect. It is the said order that is challenged by the petitioner in this writ petition. After the report of the enquiry officer was submitted to the State Government and before the Government passed the impugned order Art. 311(2) of the Constitution was amended by the Constitution Forty Second Amendment) Act 1976. The amended Art. 311(2) came into force with effect from 3.1.77.

(3.) By the said amendment the words 'and where it is proposed, after such enquiry, to impose on him any such penalty, until he has been given a reasonable opportunity of making representation on the penally proposed but only on the basis of the evidence adduced during such enquiry' were omit ed, and for the words 'provided that this clause shall not apply' the following words were substituted: