- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29584-DB WP No. 30365 of 2017 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. 30365 OF 2017 (GM-KLA) BETWEEN: SRI A M BASAVARAJAIAH S/O A M SHANTHAIAH AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS MANIHALLI VILLAGE, HIREHADAGALI POST HOOVINAHADAGALI TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT - 577002 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. HAREESH BHANDARY, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS UNDER SECRETARY TO THE DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT & PANCHAYATH RAJ DEPARTMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 01 2. KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTHA M S BUILDING, BENGALURU - 01 REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR. 3. ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR ENQUIRIES-10 KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTHA Digitally signed by VASANTHA KUMARY B K Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29584-DB WP No. 30365 of 2017 M S BUILDING, BENGALURU - 01 4. NELAGUNDA GRAMA PANCHAYATH HARPANAHALLI TQ., DAVANAGERE REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. PRATHIBHA R.K., AGA FOR R1, SRI. VENKATESH S. ARABATTI, ADV. FOR R2 AND R3, R4 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED.) [CAUSE TITLE AMENDED VIDE COURT ORDER DATED: 18.08.2018] THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE REOCRDS FROM R-1 TO 3 WHICH ULTIMATELY RESULTED IN PASSING ORDER ANNEXURE-A ORDER DATED 4.3.2017 MADE BY R-1 THE RECOMMENDATION AT ANNEX-B DATED 29.12.2014 ISSUED BY R-2 AND THE ENQUIRY REPORT ANNEXURE-C DATED 12.12.2014 ISSUED BY R-3 AND QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER AT ANNEXURE-A ORDER DATED 4.3.2017 MADE BY THE R-1 THE RECOMMENDATION ANNEXURE-B DATED 29.12.2014 ISSUED BY R-2 AND THE ENQUIRY REPORT ANNEXURE-C DATED 12.12.2014 ISSUED BY R-3. THIS 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 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29584-DB WP No. 30365 of 2017 ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR.. JUSTICE D K SINGH) The petitioner has filed this writ petition impugning the recommendation of the Upalokayukta for imposing major penalty of dismissal by the order dated 29.12.2014 under Rule- 8(viii) of the Karnataka Civil Service (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957 as well as the order passed the Disciplinary Authority dated 04.03.2017 imposing the major penalty of dismissal of the petitioner from service. 2. The petitioner was tried for accepting Rs.2,000/- as bribe amount for disbursing Rs.25,000/- under Ashraya Housing Scheme to Smt. Sharadamma W/o Manjappa. When she approached the petitioner for payment of 5th installment of Rs.5,000/-, it is alleged that the petitioner had demanded for bribe of Rs.500/- for each installment. On this basis, a complaint was lodged and trial proceedings were conducted by the Upalokayukta, in which the petitioner was found possessing bribe amount of Rs.2,000/-. FIR was registered against the petitioner in Cr.No.2/2009 for the offence punishable under Section 7, 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. It is stated that the petitioner has been - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29584-DB WP No. 30365 of 2017 convicted for the said offences by the Trial Court against which an appeal is pending before this Court. 4. The petitioner was charge-sheeted under the disciplinary proceedings for accepting bribe of Rs.2,000/- from the complainant to show official favour and for failing to maintain absolute integrity and devotion to duty and the said act of the petitioner was unbecoming of a Government servant. 5. The enquiry officer framed the charges and submitted the report before the Upalokayukta for recommending appropriate punishment against the petitioner. The Upalokayukta, after considering the misconduct and enquiry report, recommended punishment of imposing major penalty of dismissal from service. The operative part of the recommendation of the Upalokayukta reads as under: "Hence, considering the evidence on record, findings arrived by the enquiry officer, I find that the DGO deserves major punishment and there is no reason for recommending lessor punishment. Hence, in the circumstances stated above and in view of the findings recorded by the enquiry officer, I hereby recommend that the DGO Sri A.M. Basavarajaiah - Secretary, Nilagunda Gram Panchayath, - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29584-DB WP No. 30365 of 2017 Harapanahalli Taluk, Davangere District be punished with the order of dismissal in exercise of power under Rule 8(viii) of KCS (Conduct) Rules." 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has urged only one submission i.e., the Lokayukta is empowered to recommend appropriate punishment whereas, the impugned order would suggest that he has passed the order for imposing the punishment and that is not amounting to recommendation, but final order. 7. We have already extracted the recommendation which only suggests that after considering the report of the enquiry officer, the learned Upalokayukta was of the opinion that the petitioner deserves major penalty and lesser penalty cannot be recommended. We fail to understand how this order recommending major penalty can be said to be final order of punishment. We therefore, do not find any substance in the contention advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the recommendation of the Upalokayukta is without jurisdiction. 8. We are of the considered view that the impugned order of Upalokayukta is only recommendation for imposing - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29584-DB WP No. 30365 of 2017 major penalty and it is not a final order. In view of the recommendation made by the Upalokayukta, the major penalty of dismissal from service has been imposed on the petitioner and this Court finds no ground to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Upalokayukta against the petitioner . 9. Thus, we find no merits or substance in the petition. Accordingly, the petition stands dismissed. Sd/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE RKA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 46