H SREENIVASA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is an Assistant Drugs Controller and Licensing Authority in the Drugs Control Department of the Government of Karnataka. As per Annexure-A.1 order dated 19.11.2005 passed by the first respondent-Government, the petitioner was placed under suspension pending disciplinary action, THE said order was passed under Rule 10(1)(d) of the Karnataka Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957. Challenging the said order dated 19.11.2005, the petitioner filed Application No. 8721/2005 in the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal at Bangalore, under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985. While issuing notice to the respondents in the said application, the Tribunal passed an interim order dated 25.11.2005 staying the impugned order dated 19.11.2005 till 29.11.2005. In the interim order dated 25.11.2005, the Tribunal observed that it wanted to look into the records and the reports submitted by the applicant and also directed the Government Pleader to secure the records for perusal. When the case came up for further hearing on 29.11.2005, learned Government Advocate wanted to file an application for vacating the interim order and he was permitted to file the application in the Office and the case was adjourned to 1.12.2005. However, while adjourning the case to 1.12.2005, the Tribunal refused to continue the interim order granted on 25.11.2005 in view of the statement made by the learned Government Advocate that one Mr. Ansari had already taken charge on 21.11.2005 before the Tribunal passed the interim order on 25.11.2005. Aggrieved by the refusal of the Tribunal to continue the interim order of stay dated 25.11.2005, the applicant filed this Writ Petition praying for setting aside the order dated 29.11.2005 passed by the Tribunal in Application No. 8721/2005 in so far as it discontinued the interim order granted on 25.11.2005. He also prayed for stay of the order of suspension dated 19.11.2005. All the respondents in Application No. 8721/2005 filed in the Tribunal have been impleaded as respondents in the Writ Petition also.

(2.) WHILE admitting the Writ Petition on 9.12.2005, this Court passed an interim order directing that the interim order of stay passed by the Tribunal on 25.11.2005 would continue and the Writ petitioner would be allowed to continue in his original post for a period of four weeks. The said interim order was extended on 9.1.2006 till 13.1.2006. In the meanwhile, the first respondent has filed Application No. I.A. II/2005 for vacating the interim order.

(3.) RULE 10 of the Karnataka Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) RULEs, 1957 provides for suspension of a Government servant Sub-rules (1), (2) and (3) of the said RULE 10 are extracted hereunder: 10. Suspension: (1) The Appointing Authority or any authority to which it is subordinate or any other authority empowered by the Government in this behalf may place a Government servant under suspension. - (a) Where there is prima facie evidence to show that he was caught red-handed while accepting gratification other than legal remuneration by the persons authorised to investigate under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 or under any other law; (b) where a charge sheet is filed before the competent Court against him for any offence involving moral turpitude committed in the course of his duty; or (c) where a charge sheet is filed before the competent Court against him on charges of corruption, embezzlement or criminal misappropriation of Government money; (d) where there is prima facie evidence of gross dereliction of duty against him. Provided that, where the order of suspension is made by an authority empowered by Government in this behalf which is lower than the appointing authority, such authority shall forthwith report to the appointing authority the circumstances in which the order was made. (2) A Government servant shall be deemed to have been placed under suspension by an order of appointing authority-(a) with effect from the date of his detention, if he is detained in custody, whether on a criminal charge or otherwise, for a period exceeding forty-eight hours; (b) with effect from the date of his conviction, if in the event of a conviction for an offence, he is sentenced to a term of imprisonment exceeding forty-eight hours and is not forthwith dismissed or removed or compulsorily retired consequent to such conviction. Explanation.- The period of forty-eight hours referred to in Clause (b) of this sub-rule shall he computed from the commencement of the imprisonment after the conviction and for this purpose, intermittent periods of imprisonment if any, shall be taken into account. (3) The authority competent to place a Government servant under suspension shall examine the relevant material relating to the case and consider whether there is prima facie evidence to support the charges made against the Government servant and if it is satisfied on such examination that prima facie evidence exists, it may place the Government servant concerned under suspension. It is for the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal to consider whether the petitioner was placed under suspension in accordance with the provisions contained in RULE 10 of the KCS (CC & A) RULEs, 1957. At this stage, it is not necessary or proper for us to express any opinion.