- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:10740-DB RP No. 642 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K REVIEW PETITION NO. 642 OF 2022 BETWEEN: JAYASHANKAR K.T S/O LATE K.V THIMAIAH AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, EX.CONSTABLE CISF R/O #26, II CROSS, OLD KEB ROAD, ANJANANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 091. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PAVAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. DEVENDRAPPA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS HOME SECRETARY, IN THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI. 2. OFFICE OF THE SENIOR COMMANDANT / CISF MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS CISF UNIT, NALCO DAMMANJODI, DIST: KORAPUT, ORISSA STATE. Digitally signed by HARIKRISHNA V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:10740-DB RP No. 642 of 2022 3. THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF CISF EASTERN ZONE HQRS PATNA, BIHAR, GOVT OF INDIA (COMES UNDER MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS ) 4. INSPECTOR GENERAL/CISF EAST SECTOR HEAD QUARTERS BORING ROAD, NEW PATALIPUTRA COLONY, PATNA 13, BIHAR …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHANTHI BHUSHAN, DSGI) THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 114 R/W ORDER XLVII RULE 1 OF CPC, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE REVIEW PETITION, SETTING ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 18/12/2019 PASSED BY DIVISION BENCH, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU WHEREBY ALLOWED THE WRIT APPEAL NO. 5731/2012 (S-DIS). THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:10740-DB RP No. 642 of 2022 ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI) The petitioner filed this Review Petition alleging that, it was falsely alleged that the petitioner assaulted his higher officer, Sub-Inspector, D.N.P. Singh wherein, he sustained bleeding injury. A FIR was registered against him, and the article of charges was served on the petitioner. An enquiry was held. Based on the enquiry report, the petitioner was terminated from the service. An Order of punishment was challenged before the appellate authority. The appellate authority dismissed the appeal. The petitioner filed a Revision Petition before the Revisional Authority. The said Revision Petition was dismissed. He filed a writ petition in WP No.38022/2011 before the learned single judge. The writ Court partly allowed the writ petition vide order dated 29.05.2012. The respondent preferred Writ Appeal in W.A.No.5731/2012. This Court, vide judgment dated 18.12.2019, allowed the Writ Appeal. The petitioner filed this Review petition on several grounds. 2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:10740-DB RP No. 642 of 2022 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner argued the grounds raised in the memorandum of Review Petition. 4. Perused the records. 5. The petitioner has urged the facts of the case in the memo of Review Petition, but the petitioner could not point out an error apparent on the face of record. Mere acquittal in Criminal Case is not a ground for setting aside the order of penalty, which was imposed in the case of Disciplinary Enquiry. This Court has already, considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner in the Writ Appeal, and passed the judgment. We do not find any error, on the face of record in the impugned judgment. 6. Accordingly, the Review Petition is dismissed. SD/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE SD/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE VM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1