- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:9498 WP No. 26825 of 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 26825 OF 2009 (S-DIS) BETWEEN: MR. L S DINAMANI, S/O L.S.SRINIVASAN, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/AT NO.1381, SAI RAGHAVENDRA NILAYA, 4TH CROSS, 1ST STAGE, 2ND PHASE, CHANDRA LAYOUT, BANGALORE-40. …PETITIONER (BY SRI R NAGENDRA NAIK, ADVOCATE) AND: THE MANAGEMENT OF CANARA BANK, (GOVERNMENT OF INDIA UNDERTAKING INDUSTRIAL RELATION SECTION) PERSONNEL WING, NO.112, J.C.ROAD, BANGALORE-2. REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR. …RESPONDENT (BY *SRI. J. PRADEEP KUMAR ALONGWITH SRI K MOHAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR M/S KASTURI ASSTS.,) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEXURE-K BEARING NO. IRS DP KC BLCR 6879 2009 DATED 27.1.2009, AND ANNEXURE-N BEARING NO. BLCR:DAC:4407:E-37:2009 DATED 1.6.2009 AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: *INSERTED VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 21.03.2025 Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:9498 WP No. 26825 of 2009 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ ORAL ORDER The petitioner has challenged an order bearing No.IRS:DP:KC:BLCR:6879:2009, dated 27.01.2009 passed by the respondent by which, it concurred with the findings of the inquiring authority that the charges against the petitioner was proved and imposed a penalty of dismissal. The petitioner has also challenged an order dated 01.06.2009 passed by the Deputy General Manager of the respondent in an appeal against the order of the disciplinary authority vide reference No.BLCR:DAC:4407:E-37:2009 by which, his appeal was rejected. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the petitioner has challenged the findings of the disciplinary authority as well as the Appellate Authority, a criminal case filed against him by the Central Bureau of Investigation in Spl.C.C.No.36/2009 before the XXXII City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge for CBI Cases, Bengaluru, resulted in his conviction vide judgment dated 23.08.2011. He therefore, submits that this writ petition would not survive for consideration. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:9498 WP No. 26825 of 2009 3. The submission is noted. 4. This writ petition is dismissed as it does not survive for consideration. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE PMR