RAMESH BABU B.K. Vs. DIRECTOR (A & HR), KPTCL, SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER (ELECTRICAL) MANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY CO. LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SEEKING quashing of a show cause notice issued by the respondent No. 2 vide Annexure -C, this writ petition was filed. Alternatively, a mandamus has been sought against the respondent No. 2, to furnish copy of the report of respondent No. 4, dated 06.01.2014, referred to in Annexure -C, before passing any orders in pursuance of Annexure -C. Sri Mahesh R. Uppin, learned advocate, contended that, respondent No. 4 without any authority has submitted a report against the petitioner and copy thereof was not furnished to the petitioner. He submitted that the impugned proceedings being at the instance of respondent No. 4 is mala fide. He further submitted that at the instance of respondent No. 4, disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner has been initiated, since, a complaint made by the petitioner against the respondent No. 4 is pending before the Karnataka SC/ST Commission. He further submitted that on account of issuance of Annexure -C, the petitioner's promotion has been delayed and hence, interference is called for.

(2.) CERTAIN allegations have been sought to be leveled by the petitioner against the incumbent, holding the office of the respondent No. 4, who has not been impleaded as co -nominee. On account of non -impleading as co -nominee, the allegations cannot be considered, in view of the ratio of the decision in the case of State of Punjab and Others Vs. Chaman Lal Goyal, reported in : (1995) 2 SCC 570. Be that as it may.

(3.) IN response to Annexure -C, petitioner has submitted his reply on 06.02.2014 vide Annexure -D and has sought dropping of all further proceedings. Ordinarily, no writ petition can be entertained at this stage i.e., against the show cause notice as at Annexure -C, in view of the well settled position of law, in catena of decisions of the Apex Court.