- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40385 WP No. 25502 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI WRIT PETITION NO. 25502 OF 2022 (S-RES) BETWEEN: M R SADHASHIVAPPA S/O LATE RUDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS WORKING AS DEPUTY CONTROLLER OF ACCOUNTS (IA) KPTCL, SLDC ANANDA RAO CIRCLE BANGALORE - 560 009 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SRINIVASA K., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DIRECTOR (A AND HR) KPTCL KAVERI BHAVANA BANGALORE 560001. Digitally signed by SUNITHA K S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40385 WP No. 25502 of 2022 2. THE GENERAL MANAGER (HRD) CESC CORPORATE OFFICE, # 29, KAVERI BANK ROAD VIJAYANAGAR, 2ND STAGE HINAKAL MYSORE 570017 3. THE CHIEF GENRAL MAANGER (IA) CESC, CORPORATE OFFICE NO #29 KAVERI BANK, ROAD VIJAYANAGAR, 2ND STAGE HINAKAL, MYSORE 570017 4. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER (ELE) CESC, CIRCLE OFFICE HASSAN, SANTHEPETE HASSAN 573201 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VIKRAM UNNI RAJAGOPAL., ADVOCATE FOR R1 SMT/MISS RAKSHITHA D.J., ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED MEMORANDUM OF CHARGE BEING NO.KPTCL/B94/3681/2022.23 DATED 19.08.2022,ISSUED BY THE R1 VIDE ANNEXURE-G TO THE WRIT PETITION ONLY IN SO FAR ITS RELATES TO THE PETITIONER CONCERNED AND - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40385 WP No. 25502 of 2022 DIRECTING THE R2 ACCEPT AND CONSIDERED THE REPLY SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 01.09.2022 VIDE ANNEXURE-H TO THE WRIT PETITION AND CONSEQUENTLY TO DROP ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS IN THE MATTER. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI ORAL ORDER This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking the following reliefs: "1. Issue a writ of certiorari quashing the impugned memorandum of charge bearing No.KPTCL/B94/36381/2022-23 dated 19.08.2022, issued by the 1st respondent vide Annexure-G to the writ petition, only in so for as its relates to the petitioner is concerned. 2. Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent no.2 accept and consider the reply submitted by the petitioner dated 01.09.2022 vide Annexure-H to the writ petition and consequently to drop all further proceedings in the matter. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40385 WP No. 25502 of 2022 3. Pass any other appropriate order/orders, writ, as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit to pass under the facts and circumstances of the case, to meet the ends of justice and equity." 2. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this petition are as follows: 2.1. The petitioner is working in the respondent- Corporation since 1987 and has been discharging the duties with sincerity and honesty without giving the scope to any kind of allegation. Considering his unblemished record of service, he was promoted from time to time and presently is discharging the work as a Deputy Controller of Accounts. Respondent No.1, purely on a wrong and misleading report, had issued a memorandum of charge sheet dated 19.08.2022 to the petitioner, and three other Officials, who are in charge of the stores, and made certain charges of which no way related to the petitioner. The loss, if any, in the stores is attributable to the four officials who are in charge of the management, supervision and control of the store materials. The petitioner is an odd - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40385 WP No. 25502 of 2022 man to the stores and his duty is only to verify on random basis or 10% of the materials, and to check the ledger entries. The report submitted by the petitioner after physical verification of the materials, and ledger entries was duly accepted. After the report submitted by the petitioner technically qualified, Assistant Executive Engineer had also conducted 100% physical verification of the material along with the ledger balance and found that there was no shortage or loss of materials. The said report was duly checked and accepted by the head of the circle. This has been done in accordance with the mandatory provisions contained in the accounts manual. In spite of this, respondent No.1, without any just and proper reasons, without any prima facie case against the petitioner, had blindly and mechanically with the bias and prejudice, had issued a memorandum of charges dated 19.08.2022. The petitioner, aggrieved by the issuance of memorandum of charges dated 19.08.2022, filed this writ petition. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40385 WP No. 25502 of 2022 3. The respondents, in spite of granting sufficient opportunity, have not filed a statement of objections. 4. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner and, the learned counsel for the respondents. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the memorandum of charges has been issued against the preliminary enquiry report. He submits that, from the perusal of the preliminary enquiry report, there is no allegation against the petitioner. The allegations are against the other three Officials. Without considering the contents of the preliminary enquiry report, the respondents have issued memorandum of charges. The said memorandum of charges is contrary to the contents of the preliminary enquiry report. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow the writ petition. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is premature and further, insofar as allegations are - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40385 WP No. 25502 of 2022 concerned, that can be decided only after a full-fledged enquiry. He submits that, though there is no allegation against the petitioner in the preliminary enquiry report, however, the respondents have issued the memorandum of charges on the materials. Hence, the action of the respondents in issuing the memorandum of charges is in accordance with law. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to dismiss the writ petition. 7. Perused the records, and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. 8. There is no dispute that the petitioner was working in the respondent-Corporation and he was discharging his duty as a Deputy Controller of Accounts. Respondent No.1 based on the audit objection, ordered for a preliminary enquiry. The preliminary enquiry report dated 23.10.2020 was submitted and marked as Annexure-E. From perusal of the preliminary enquiry report, it does not disclose any allegation against the petitioner. However, there are allegations against the - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40385 WP No. 25502 of 2022 three Officials. The respondents, without considering the preliminary enquiry report, has issued memorandum of charges to the petitioner. The petitioner has produced the audit manual of the respondent-Corporation, which discloses that, the duty of the Assistant Account Officer is only regarding to the stores inspection: (a) General review of numerical ledgers so as to ascertain that the postings are up to date. (b) Random check of store balances of 10% of the items of materials. Enter counted balance of the counting sheets and obtain signature of the Store Keeper. Items to be checked should include essential line materials, iron, cement, lamps, tubelights, insulated wires, fuse wires, torch cells, silver lead and soldering lead, pipes of different varieties, copper conductor and T and P materials. (c) Entered counted balance in the respective ledger (in words and with dated initials) and ledger balances on the counting sheets, workout differences between ledger balance and counted balance and enter on counting sheets. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40385 WP No. 25502 of 2022 9. From the perusal of the duties of the Accounts Officer, the duty of the Accounts Officer is only to check the numerical or to review the numerical ledgers so as to ascertain the postings are upto date, and also enter counted balance of counting sheets, and obtain signature of the Store Keeper. The petitioner has submitted the report to the concerned Authority. The concerned Authority accepted the report submitted by the petitioner, and did not find any shortage or loss of materials. The said report was duly checked, and accepted by the Head of the Circle. Without considering the said aspect, the memorandum of charges was issued by the respondents and it is contrary to the report submitted by the petitioner, and also preliminary report. Thus, the memorandum of charges issued by the respondents is arbitrary and erroneous. Hence, on this ground, the impugned memorandum of charges is liable to be set aside. 10. In view of the above discussion, I proceed to pass the following: - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40385 WP No. 25502 of 2022 ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed; ii. The impugned memorandum of charges vide Annexure-G insofar as the petitioner is concerned, is hereby set aside; iii. In view of disposal of the petition, pending IAs do not survive for consideration. Sd/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE PA CT:KHV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29