VIRUPAKSHI Vs. KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Sri S.S. Kumman, learned counsel is directed to take notice for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Sri A. Syed Habeeb, learned Additional Government Advocate is directed to take notice for the respondent No. 3.

(2.) The petitioner has called into question the first respondent's enquiry report, dated 07.10.2015 (Annexure -B), the second respondent's recommendations contained in the communication, dated 13.10.2015 (Annexure -C) and the show cause notice, dated 26.11.2015 (Annexure -D).

(3.) Sri R.S. Sidhapurkar, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is acquitted by the criminal court. On the same set of facts, the respondents have initiated the departmental enquiry. He submits that based on the enquiry report holding the petitioner guilty of the alleged misconduct, the respondent No. 2 has recommended that the petitioner be awarded the penalty of removal from Government service. Learned counsel submits that the respondent No. 2 has no power to make such recommendation. According to him, the recommendations are without the authority of law and without jurisdiction. He submits that the respondent No. 3 has issued show cause notice and that the petitioner has already submitted his reply thereto. The third respondent is not considering the explanation offered by the petitioner, so submits the learned counsel. He submits that the petitioner has the apprehension that the third respondent may pass the punitive order without considering the petitioner's explanation.