- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3620 WP No. 103794 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 103794 OF 2024 (S-RES) BETWEEN: SHRI. J. MANJUNATH S/O. LATE J. SHIVAPPA, AGE. 49 YEARS, OCC. SECTION OFFICER/ JUNIOR OFICER OF GESCOM, TAMBARAHALLI, R/O. BANDIHALLI ROAD, OPP. KGN BRICKS, RAGHAVENDRA COLONY, HAGARABOMMANAHALLI- 583212, TQ. HAGARABOMMANAHALLI, DIST. VIJAYANAGARA. …PETITIONER (BY SRI PRUTHVI K.S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LTD., (KPTCL) KAVERI BHAVAN, K. G. ROAD, BENGALURU- 560009. 2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR (ELE) CORPORTE OFFICE, GESCOM, KALABURAGI- 585102, TQ. AND DIST. KALABURAGI. 3. THE CHIEF ENGINEER (ELE) O AND M ZONE, NEAR BUDA OFFICE, BALLARI- 583101, Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3620 WP No. 103794 of 2024 TQ. AND DIST. BALLARI. 4. THE SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER (ELE) AND ENQUIRY OFFICER, O AND M CIRCLE, GESCOM, BALLARI- 583101, TQ. AND DIST. BALLARI. 5. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELE) O AND M DIVISION, GESCOM, HAGARABOMMANAHALLI- 583212, TQ. HAGARABOMMANAHALLI, DIST. VIJAYANAGARA. 6. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, O AND M SUB DIVISION, GESCOM, HAGARABOMMANAHALLI- 583212, TQ. HAGARABOMMANAHALLI, DIST. VIJAYANAGARA. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI SHIVARAJ P. MUDHOL, ADVOCATE FOR R1, SRI ANOOP G. DESHPANDE, ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R6) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA IS PRAYING TO A. ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI BY QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 13-02-2023 BRG. NO. AAAA(VI)/ UULENI/LEAA/ SALEAA/ KIAASA/ 2022- 23/8379-83 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.4 VIDE ANNEXURE-J, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. B) ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI BY QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 18/6/2024 BRG NO. MUEE/LENIAA/LEAA/HISA- 1/BAVA/24-25/K- 20(42)/1720-24 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 VIDE ANNEXURE-L, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. C) ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS BY DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS NOT TO DEDUCT FROM THE SALARY OF THE PETITIONER AND PROVIDE THE SALARY ALONG WITH INCREMENT TO THE PETITIONER, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. D) ISSUE SUCH OTHER SUITABLE ORDER/S DIRECTIONS AS THIS HON’BLE COURT DEEMS FIT AND PROPER IN THE NATURE AND - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3620 WP No. 103794 of 2024 CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA) 1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayer: A) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari by quashing the impugned order dated 13-02-2023 Brg. No. AaAa(Vi)/ UuLeNi/LeAa/ SaLeAa/ KiAaSa/ 2022- 23/8379-83 passed by the respondent no.4 vide Annexure-J, in the interest of justice and equity. B) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari by quashing the impugned order dated 18/6/2024 Brg No. MuEE/ LeNiAa/ LeAa/HiSa-1/BaVa/24-25/K- 20(42)/1720- 24 passed by the respondent no.3 vide annexure-l, in the interest of justice and equity. C) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus by directing the respondents not to deduct from the salary of the petitioner and provide the salary along with increment to the Petitioner, in the interest of justice and equity. D) Issue such other suitable order/s directions as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the nature and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity. 2. Heard the learned counsel Sri.Pruthvi K.S., appearing for the petitioner, learned counsel Sri.Shivaraj P. Mudhol appearing for respondent No.1, and the learned - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3620 WP No. 103794 of 2024 counsel Sri.Anoop G. Deshpande appearing for respondent Nos.2 to 6. 3. Facts in brief germane are as follows: The petitioner is appointed as a Section officer on 31.01.2003. Owing to certain omissions and commissions, departmental enquiry is initiated against the petitioner for non-returning of 131 failed transformers. The enquiry officer so appointed, exonerates the petitioner, it is the admitted fact. The disciplinary authority disagrees with the findings of the enquiry officer and imposes penalty of recovery of Rs.25,64,550/- by directing deduction from salary at Rs.13,000/- per month and also imposes penalty of reduction of two increments with cumulative effect. 4. The issue in the lis revolves around a narrow compass. When the enquiry officer had admittedly exonerated the petitioner, penalty could not have been imposed without at the outset disagreeing with the findings of the enquiry officer and issuing to the petitioner a notice of such disagreement. It is again an admitted fact - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3620 WP No. 103794 of 2024 that the disciplinary authority has not disagreed with the findings of the enquiry officer, but has imposed the penalty. Therefore, there is violation of principles of natural justice as held by the Apex Court in plethora of judgments that the disciplinary authority cannot impose penalty on a report which exonerates the delinquent employee without issuing a notice of such disagreement. Since the issue lies in the said compass at this juncture, I deem it appropriate to obliterate the order of penalty and direct the disciplinary authority to issue notice, seek the reply of the petitioner, if it still wants to disagree with the findings of the enquiry officer and pass necessary orders in accordance with law. For the aforesaid reasons, the following: ORDER i. Petition is allowed in part. ii. The impugned order dated 13.02.2023 passed by the respondent No.4 vide Annexure-J and the impugned order dated 18.06.2024 passed - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3620 WP No. 103794 of 2024 by the respondent No.3 vide Annexure-L stand quashed. iii. The matter is remitted back to the hands of the disciplinary authority. The disciplinary authority to pass necessary orders bearing in mind the observations made in the course of the order. iv. The order with regard to refund of recovered amount or otherwise shall remain subject to the result of the order that would be passed by the disciplinary authority on subject remand within three months from the date of receipt of copy of the order. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- ____________________ JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA KGK/CT-GTB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30