STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. VEERAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition by the State Government and its official invokes writ jurisdiction for laying a challenge to the Service Tribunal's Order dtd. 26/5/2020 whereby respondent-employee's Application No.295/2019 having been favoured, the punishment order of compulsory retirement dtd. 26/12/2018 handed in a disciplinary proceedings has been quashed.

(2.) Learned Government Advocate appearing for the petitioners and the learned Panel Counsel appearing for the respondent-Lokayukta vehemently argue that the impugned order of the Tribunal has a plethora of infirmities: Firstly, the Tribunal has approached the matter as if it is an Appellate Authority sitting in appeal over the Disciplinary Authority, which is impermissible; after S.P. Sampath Kumar vs. UOI,AIR 1987 SC 386. followed by L.Chandrakumar vs. UOI,AIR 1997 SC 1125. the jurisdiction exercised by the Tribunal is akin to the writ jurisdiction constitutionally vested under Articles 226 & 227, the Tribunal erred in focusing the product instead of the process.

(3.) Learned GA adds that all the witnesses examined on behalf of the employer in the Disciplinary Enquiry have supported the case against the delinquency of respondent-employee; the departmental enquiry was held in accordance with the prescribed procedure and with the participation of the employee; the Tribunal could not have reassessed the evidentiary material to adjudge the finding of guilt of the employee. Learned Panel Counsel appearing for the Lokayukta has graciously made available original records for our perusal and in substantiation of his stand.