KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA Vs. ISHWAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition by the Lokayukta invokes writ jurisdiction of this Court for the quashment of Service Tribunal's Order dtd. 7/12/2021 whereby respondent - employee's Application No.5116/2018 having been favoured the punishment order of compulsory retirement dtd. 7/4/2018 has been set aside.

(2.) Learned Senior Advocate Shri Ashok Harnanahalli argues that there are two significant infirmities in the impugned order namely: (i) the Tribunal has recorded a finding that there is violation of Sec. 9(3) of the Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984 when apparently there is compliance and therefore there was absolutely no scope for invoking Sec. 9(3)(a) & (b) of the Act vide N. Gundappa Vs. State of Karnataka ; ILR 1990 KAR 223 (ii) in any event, after quashment of punishment order, the Tribunal could not have foreclosed the proceedings, but could have remanded the matter for consideration afresh. He also points out that long pendency of a matter is no ground for foreclosing the proceedings more particularly when the delinquent employee is still in service.

(3.) After service of notice, the delinquent employee being the first respondent has entered appearance through his private advocate who vehemently resists the petition on the ground of lack of locus standii of the Lokayukta; the Tribunal has after examining the records has entered a finding as to non-compliance of Sec. 9(3) of the 1984 Act and that does merit a deeper examination in the writ jurisdiction; the Tribunal has given a cogent finding as to why it has foreclosed the proceedings; lastly, the Articles of Charge are not specific. So contending, he seeks dismissal of the petition.