- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29593-DB WP No. 8911 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JULY, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T WRIT PETITION NO.8911 OF 2023 (GM-KLA) BETWEEN: MR. C. PRAKASH S/O. LATE CHANNABASAVAIAH AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS IN CHARGE SECRETARY BACHENAHATTI GRAMA PANCHAYATHI MAGADI TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-562 120 RESIDENT OF PALANAHALLI VILLAGE HULUKUNTE POST, SOLURU HOBLI MAGADI TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 127. …PETITIONER (BY SRI PARAMESHWAR N. HEGDE, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS UNDER SECRETARY (ZP) RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU-01. 2. UPALOKAYUKTHA -2 KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTHA M.S. BUILDING DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU-01. Digitally signed by MOUNESHWARAPPA NAGARATHNA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29593-DB WP No. 8911 of 2023 3. ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR (ENQUIRIES) KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTHA M.S. BUILDING DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU-01. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. PRATHIBHA R.K., AGA FOR R-1; SRI VENKATESH S. ARABATTI, ADVOCATE FOR R-2 AND R-3) * * * THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 31-12-2021 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT VIDE NO.VDP/71/VPS/2021 AT ANNEXURE-A, RECOMMENDATION DATED 21-10-2019 MADE BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT VIDE NO.UPLOK-2/DE/88/2018/ARE-12 AT ANNEXURE-B AND THE ENQUIRY REPORT DATED 18-10-2019 PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT IN UPLOK-2/DE/88/2018/ARE-12 AT ANNEXURE-C. THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH) 1. The petitioner, who was working as in-charge Secretary of Banchenahhatti Village panchayath, Adakamaranahalli for the year 2012-2013 and 2013-2014 had faced disciplinary proceedings for the following charges in respect of three - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29593-DB WP No. 8911 of 2023 different works undertaken under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Project(MGNREGA) scheme in the Bachanahalli Village Panchayat. Said charges are as follows:- APPENDIX-1 CHARGE SHEET xxxxxxxxxxxxxx DGO-2/Sri C. Prakash herein, when you were working as in-charge Secretary of Banchenahatti village Panchayat, Magadi Taluk, during your service period by committing below mentioned malpractice you have committed dereliction of duty as hereunder. During the year 2012-13 and 2013-14 under Mahatma Gandhi National Employment Guarantee Project several works taken up in the Adakamaranahalli village which comes within the limits of Bachenahalli Village Panchayath and as detailed hereunder committed malpractice you have misused the money and its details are as hereunder. i. That for formation of flood control wall from the house of Ramanna up to the house of Narasimhamurthy of Adakamaranahalli village, Bachenahatti Village Panchayat, Magadi Taluk, the said work at the estimated cost of Rs.3 lakhs taken up under Mahatma Gandhi National Employment Guarantee Project and for which estimation given also as per the said grant road formation work performed, by looking at the same it is noticed that from the house of Ramanna up to the house of - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29593-DB WP No. 8911 of 2023 Narasimhamurthy in total 56.00 meters long concrete road only physically formed even though in the measurement book it is falsely stated as 149 meters long concrete road formed and paid the grant amount also. But without doing 93 meters of long concrete road, it is falsely entered in measurement book also in other records as the said road at full length concrete road is formed and accordingly paid the money and through which the said amount is misused. ii. That for formation of flood control wall from the house of Shivanna up to the house of Narasimhaiah of Adakamaranahalli village, Bachenahatti Village Panchayat, Magadi Taluk, the said work at the estimated cost of Rs.2 lakhs taken up under Mahatma Gandhi National Employment Guarantee Project and for which estimation given also as per the said grant drainage construction work performed, by looking at the same it is noticed that from the house of Shivanna up to the house of Narasimhaiah in total 54.75 meters long drainage construction only physically formed even though in the measurement book it is falsely stated as 81.80 meters long drainage constructed and paid the grant amount also. But without doing 27.05 mtrs long drainage it is falsely entered in measurement book also in other records as the said and accordingly paid the money and through which the said amount is misused. iii. That for formation of flood control wall from the house of Veerabhadraiah up to the house of Duggaiah of Adakamaranahalli village, Bachenahatti Village Panchayat, Magadi Taluk, the said work at the estimated cost of Rs.2 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29593-DB WP No. 8911 of 2023 lakhs taken up under Mahatma Gandhi National Employment Guarantee Project and for which estimation given also as per the said grant road formation work performed, by looking at the same it is noticed that from the house of Ramanna up to the house of Narasimhamurthy in total 79.80 meters long concrete road only physically formed even though in the measurement book it is falsely stated as 104 meters long concrete road formed and paid the grant amount also. But without doing 24.20 meters of long concrete road, it is falsely entered in measurement book also in other records as the said road totally 104 meters length of concrete road is formed and accordingly paid the money and through which the said amount is misused. You being the public/government servant without showing sincerity in performing your duty committed dereliction and acted in the manner which is not fair on the part of a government servant being a responsible government employee even though by violating the rules without following sincerity and duty conscious you have acted detrimental to the interest of a government servant and committed misconduct/misbehaviour manner and committed misconduct under Rule 3(i) to (iii) of Karnataka Civil Service Rules (Conduct) 1966, hence charged against you under Karnataka Civil Service Rules (Classification, Restriction & Appeal) 1957. 2. The Inquiry Officer fixed the date on 8.05.2018 at 10.00 a.m. for holding enquiry. However, the petitioner-delinquent - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29593-DB WP No. 8911 of 2023 Government Officer asked for adjournment on the ground that he was on election duty on the said date. Considering the said request by the petitioner-delinquent Officer, the Inquiry Officer adjourned the proceedings for 03.07.2018, even on 03.07.2018 and thereafter, the petitioner chose not to appear in the enquiry, and therefore, the enquiry proceedings proceeded ex-parte against the petitioner. The Inquiry Officer submitted his report before the learned Upalokayukta. The Articles of Charge were proved against the petitioner in the inquiry. Upalokayukta, vide his order dated 21.10.2019 recommended for imposing the following punishment on the petitioner:- 1. "It is hereby recommended to the Government to impose penalty of withholding 2 annual increments payable to DGO. 2 Sri. C. Prakash with cumulative effect and also to recover a sum of Rs.1,48,235/- from the salary and allowances payable to DGO 2 Shri. C. Prakash". 3. The order passed by Upalokayukta dated 21.10.2019, on conclusion of Departmental enquiry by the Inquiry Officer would suggest that learned Upalokayukta has considered the inquiry report and all other material and recommended the aforesaid penalty to be imposed on the petitioner. The - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29593-DB WP No. 8911 of 2023 Disciplinary Authority thereafter, issued two show-cause notices to the petitioner calling for his response to the proposed punishment on him. The petitioner submitted his replies. 4. After considering the replies submitted by the petitioner to the two show-cause notices issued by the Disciplinary Authority, the impugned order of punishment imposing penalties have been imposed as recommended by Upalokayukta. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has raised primarily two contentions in support of the writ petition:- a. The petitioner was not given sufficient opportunity by the Inquiry Officer to defend his case after 08.05.2018 as he was not intimated the next date of proceedings by the Inquiry Officer after 08.05.2018. b. The Disciplinary Authority has not adverted to the replies submitted by the petitioner to the two show-cause notices and there is no application of mind by the Disciplinary Authority. 6. On the other hand, Smt. Prathibha R.K. learned Addl. Government Advocate appearing for respondent No.1 submits - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29593-DB WP No. 8911 of 2023 that the Panchayat Secretary being the disbursing authority of the work done in the Panchayat cannot gets absolved from responsibility and liability, if it is found that the payment was made for no work having been done. It is submitted that if the inquiry report is considered, it is evident that payment was made under the signature of the petitioner for the work which was not undertaken and only it was on paper. 7. In reply to the submission that the petitioner was not given opportunity by the Inquiry Officer to defend his case after 08.05.2018, it is submitted that on request of the petitioner, the inquiry was adjourned on 08.05.2018 and thereafter, there was no request on behalf of the petitioner to take adjournment and he did not appear in the inquiry and therefore, the Inquiry Officer had no other option than to proceed against the petitioner ex-parte. It may be noted that the petitioner thereafter did not appear on any of the dates fixed by the Inquiry Officer to participate in the inquiry. 8. It is further submitted that the Disciplinary Authority has considered the inquiry report, response of the petitioner to the two show-cause notices, and thereafter, has taken considered view and in-fact a lenient view has been taken to impose penalties as mentioned above. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29593-DB WP No. 8911 of 2023 9. Submission of the respondents is that the inquiry is neither vitiated on the ground that the procedural infirmity or violation of natural justice nor the punishment imposed on the petitioner is disproportionate to the misconduct proved against him. 10. We have considered the submissions and perused the records of the writ petition including the orders passed by the learned Upalokayukta and Disciplinary Authority. 11. So far as question of ex-parte proceedings against the petitioner is concerned, the petitioner himself invited ex-parte proceedings, inasmuch as, after 08.05.2018, the petitioner chose not to appear in the inquiry and absented himself from the inquiry throughout. Thus, the petitioner cannot put the blame on the Inquiry Officer, when he deliberately chose not to appear in the inquiry and allowed the Inquiry Officer to proceed ex-parte in the inquiry. The petitioner cannot deny the fact that he was the disbursing authority for the work done in the panchayat, and the amounts were paid under his signature, where the work was only on paper. 12. We have perused the impugned order passed by the Disciplinary Authority, which is quite detail and every fact and circumstance - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29593-DB WP No. 8911 of 2023 were considered while concurring with the recommendations of the Upalokayukta for imposing penalties as mentioned above. 13. In view thereof, we do not find any infirmity in the impugned orders which requires an interference of this Court in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of Constitution of India. In view thereof, we find no merit and substance in this writ petition, and it is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE MN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 47