VEERANNA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Appeal is presented by the State against the order of the learned single Judge allowing the writ petition of the respondent an ex-Village Accountant in the Revenue Departmpnt of the State Government and setting aside the order imposing the penalty of dismissal from service against him.

(2.) The facts of the case, in brief, are as follow:- Disciplinary proceedings ware instituted by the Government against the respondent, who was a Village Accountant. The inquiry on the charges levelled against him was conducted by the Vigilance Commission, who found the respondent guilty of the charges. Accepting the finding, the disciplinary authority, i.e., the State Government, imposed the penalty of dismissal from service against him. Aggrieved by the order, the respondent presented the writ petition.

(3.) The writ petition was allowed solely on the ground that a copy of the report of the inquiring authority wasnot furnished to the respondent and thereby an opportunity to put-forth his say against the report of the inquiring authority before the disciplinary authority was denied and therefore there was violation of rules of natural justice. The learned single Judge, while allowing the writ petition, relied on a Division Bench decision of this Court in Mahabaleshwar Pandarinath Naik v State of Karnataka and others (1982(1) Kar.L.J. 105). In the said decision, the Division Bench held that even after the amendment of Article 311 (2) of the Constitution by the 42nd Amendment to the Constitution, deleting the provision which required the g'ving of second opportunity in all cases where the inquiry was held by an Officer other than the Disciplinary Authority, principles of natural justice required that a copy of the report of the inquiry must be furnished to the delinquent official and he should have an opportunity of contesting the findings recorded by the inquiring authority and that if no such opportunity was given, the order of dismissal was liable to be quashed,