KPTCL Vs. IBRAHIM N.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This intra Court appeal has been filed against order dtd. 3/2/2020 passed in W.P.No.37030/2017 by which the writ petition preferred by the respondent has been disposed of.

(2.) Facts giving rise to filing of this appeal briefly stated are that the respondent was appointed as a Junior Engineer (Electrical) in the establishment of Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'the Corporation'). The respondent, at the relevant point of time, was posted as Sec. Officer, MESCOM, Avinahalli Branch, Sagar Taluk, Shivamogga District. The respondent was also given an additional charge of Additional Assistant Engineer and Care Branch. One Mr.Firoz lodged a complaint on 21/11/2014 against the respondent before the Police Inspector, Lokayukta, inter alia stating that for preparation of the estimation report, the respondent had demanded bribe from the complainant. It is further submitted that the complainant had paid a sum of Rs.1,000.00 and the respondent had called him to pay the remaining amount of Rs.4,000.00.

(3.) On the basis of the aforesaid complaint, the first information report was registered against the respondent for the offence punishable under Ss. 7, 13(1)(d) read with Sec. 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). Thereafter, the Director of the Corporation has passed an order under Sec. 12(3) of the Act as well as under Regulation 14 of the Karnataka Electricity Board Employees Classification, Disciplinary Control and Appeal Regulations, 1987. The respondent being aggrieved by the aforesaid order dtd. 29/7/2017 passed by the Director of Corporation, challenged the same in the writ petition. The learned Single Judge inter alia held that the order dtd. 29/7/2017 passed by the Director suffers from the vice of non-application of mind as no reasons have been assigned. The order dtd. 29/7/2017 has been quashed and the proceeding has been restored to the file of Director of Corporation to examine the matter in terms of Sec. 12(4) of the Act and thereafter, to arrive at the decision afresh within a period of four weeks. The appellants, instead of taking any action, have filed this appeal.