- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:2411 WP No. 28108 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT WRIT PETITION NO. 28108 OF 2024 (S-RES) BETWEEN: SRI NAYAZ F S/O FAZRULLA SABM AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS BEHIND GOVT. HIGH SCHOOL, CHALLAKERE TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT, KARNATAKA – 577543. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SRINIVASA K., ADV.) AND: 1. THE GENERAL MANAGER (A AND HR) (BESCOM), K R CIRCLE BENGALURU-560 001. 2. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER (ELEC) O AND M CIRCLE, BESCOM, DAVANGERE - 577002. 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELEC) O AND M DIVISION, BESCOM CHITRADURGA-577501. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.VIKRAM UNNI RAJAGOPAL, ADV.) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF DISMISSAL FROM SERVICE BEARING NO. DATED Digitally signed by MARIGANGAIAH PREMAKUMARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:2411 WP No. 28108 of 2024 01.08.2024 PASSED BY THE R-3 VIDE ANNX-V TO THE WRIT PETITION AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO REINSTATE THE PETITIONER BACK INTO THE POST OF JUNIOR LINEMAN WITH CONTINUITY OF SERVICE AND ALL OTHER CONSEQUENTIAL BENEFITS INCLUDING FULL ARREARS OF SALARY FROM THE DATE OF DISMISSAL TILL THE DATE REINSTATEMENT. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT ORAL ORDER Heard the learned counsel Sri.Srinivasa.K., for petitioner and learned counsel Sri.Vikram Unni Rajagopal for respondent Nos.1 to 3. Perused the writ petition papers. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner joined services of the respondents as Junior Lineman in terms of order of appointment dated 18.07.2017 and had undergone training. Petitioner had claimed reservation under physically challenged while getting appointment as Junior Lineman. The respondent under Annexure-T dated 24.06.2024 issued charge memo - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:2411 WP No. 28108 of 2024 to the petitioner under Rule 11 and 11(a) of KEB Employees (CCA) Rules, 187 (for short, ‘1987 Rules’) alleging that while getting appointment as Junior Lineman, petitioner had submitted false medical certificate. The petitioner submitted his reply under Annexure-U dated 23.07.2024. The respondents without conducting any enquiry passed impugned order dated 01.08.2024 (Annexure-V) terminating the services of the petitioner on the ground that petitioner had submitted false medical certificate while getting appointment as Junior Lineman. Challenging the said order of termination, petitioner is before this Court. 3. Learned counsel Sri.K.Srinivasa would submit that the respondents having issued charge memo under Rule 11 and 11(a) of 1987 Rules are required to proceed with the enquiry. The respondents have failed to follow the procedure prescribed under Rule 11 and 11(a) of 1987 Rules and without conducting any enquiry, passed impugned order of termination. Learned counsel would - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:2411 WP No. 28108 of 2024 further submit that when an allegation of submitting false medical certificate is made, the respondents ought to have conducted appropriate enquiry by affording an opportunity to the petitioner. As the respondents have failed to conduct enquiry, learned counsel would pray for quashing the impugned order of termination. Learned counsel would also places reliance on the decision of Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.261/2020 and Connected Appeals dated 09.11.2020. 4. Per contra, learned counsel Sri.Vikram Unni Rajagopal for respondents would submit that the petitioner committed misconduct by furnishing false medical certificate at the time of his appointment. As such, he supports the impugned order passed by respondents. Further, he submits that the petitioner was on probation and as such, the respondents could terminate the services of the petitioner without conducting any enquiry. 5. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusal of the writ petition papers, I am - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:2411 WP No. 28108 of 2024 of the view that impugned order of termination dated 01.08.2024 requires interference since the petitioner is dismissed without conducting enquiry attaching stigma. 6. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was appointed as Junior Lineman in the respondent-BESCOM under the quota meant for physically challenged. It is also an admitted fact that respondents have issued charge memo dated 24.06.2024 (Annexure-T) under Rule 11 and 11(a) of 1987 Rules alleging submitting false medical certificate while getting appointment as Junior Lineman. On receiving reply from the petitioner, respondents without conducting any enquiry held that the petitioner has submitted false medical certificate and terminated his service. The impugned order of termination attaches stigma. When serious allegation of submitting false medical certificate is made against a person, proper enquiry in terms of Rules of the respondent-BESCOM would be necessary. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:2411 WP No. 28108 of 2024 7. The Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.261/2020 (supra), has made it clear that even where a probationer is to be discharged, the Court can always go into the true character of the order and if it is found that the discharge is in reality a cloak for an order of punishment, then it is necessary that an enquiry should be held. 8. For the reasons recorded above, the following: ORDER a) Impugned order at Annexure-V bearing No.PÁ.¤.EA.(«)/¯É.C./¸À.¯É.C./»¸À(¹)/azÀÄCY S-01 dated 01.08.2024 is quashed. b) The respondents are directed to reinstate the petitioner and consequential benefit would depend on the outcome of the enquiry that is to be conducted by the respondents. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:2411 WP No. 28108 of 2024 c) The respondents are at liberty to proceed further in terms of charge memo at Annexure-T dated 24.06.2024. d) Four weeks time is granted for reinstating the petitioner into service. e) With the above, writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE NC CT:bms List No.: 1 Sl No.: 35