Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Sri Shivaprasad Biradar, an Assistant Engineer in the Public Works Department, challenged an enquiry initiated against him by the Karnataka Lokayukta based on a complaint by one Subash Hosamani. The Lokayukta issued articles of charges and submitted a report under Section 12(3) of the Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984, leading to an enquiry order by the State Government. The appellant filed a writ petition before the Single Judge, which was dismissed. In the writ appeal, the Division Bench examined whether the Lokayukta had conducted a preliminary verification before initiating the enquiry. The court noted that the Lokayukta had not conducted any preliminary verification, which is a mandatory requirement under Section 12(3) of the Act. The court held that the initiation of enquiry without preliminary verification is invalid and set aside the Single Judge's order and the enquiry proceedings. The appeal was allowed, and the matter was remitted to the Lokayukta to conduct a preliminary verification if deemed necessary.
Headnote
A) Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984 - Section 12(3) - Preliminary Verification - Mandatory Requirement - Enquiry initiated without preliminary verification is invalid - The court held that the Lokayukta must conduct a preliminary verification before issuing articles of charges and proceeding with enquiry under Section 12(3). Failure to do so vitiates the entire enquiry proceedings. (Paras 4-6)
B) Writ Appeal - Maintainability - Challenge to Enquiry Order - The writ appeal against the dismissal of writ petition challenging the Lokayukta's enquiry order is maintainable as the order suffers from lack of jurisdiction due to non-compliance with mandatory statutory requirement. (Paras 1-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the initiation of enquiry by the Karnataka Lokayukta under Section 12(3) of the Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984 without conducting a preliminary verification is valid?
Final Decision
The writ appeal is allowed. The order dated 02.11.2018 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.203924/2018 is set aside. The enquiry proceedings initiated against the appellant are quashed. The matter is remitted to the Lokayukta to conduct a preliminary verification if deemed necessary, and proceed in accordance with law.
Law Points
- Preliminary verification under Section 12(3) of Karnataka Lokayukta Act
- 1984 is mandatory before initiation of enquiry
- Enquiry order without preliminary verification is invalid
- Writ appeal against dismissal of writ petition challenging Lokayukta enquiry is maintainable
Case Details
2019 LawText (KAR) (03) 45
Writ Appeal No.200715/2018 (S-DE)
P.B.Bajanthri, P.G.M.Patil
Sri Ameet Kumar Deshpande for Sri H. M. Muralidhar, Sri Mallanna Reddy (for appellant); Sri S. S. Kumman, Spl.PP for R1 & R2 (absent); Sri K.M.Ghate, AGA for R3
Karnataka Lokayukta, Karnataka Upalokayukta, State of Karnataka
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ appeal against dismissal of writ petition challenging enquiry initiated by Karnataka Lokayukta under Section 12(3) of the Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984.
Remedy Sought
Appellant sought to set aside the order of the Single Judge dated 02.11.2018 in W.P.No.203924/2018 and quash the enquiry proceedings initiated by the Lokayukta.
Filing Reason
Appellant challenged the validity of the enquiry initiated by the Lokayukta on the ground that no preliminary verification was conducted before issuing articles of charges.
Previous Decisions
The Single Judge dismissed the writ petition (W.P.No.203924/2018) on 02.11.2018.
Issues
Whether the initiation of enquiry by the Karnataka Lokayukta under Section 12(3) of the Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984 without conducting a preliminary verification is valid?
Submissions/Arguments
Appellant argued that the Lokayukta did not conduct any preliminary verification before issuing articles of charges and submitting a report under Section 12(3), which is mandatory.
Respondents did not appear or argue; the Special Public Prosecutor for R1 and R2 was absent, and the Additional Government Advocate for R3 made no submissions on the merits.
Ratio Decidendi
Under Section 12(3) of the Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984, the Lokayukta is required to conduct a preliminary verification before initiating an enquiry. Failure to do so renders the enquiry invalid. The court held that the mandatory requirement of preliminary verification cannot be dispensed with.
Judgment Excerpts
In the instant appeal, appellant has assailed the learned Single Judge’s order dated 02.11.2018 passed in W.P.No.203924/2018.
The Lokayukta has not conducted any preliminary verification before issuing articles of charges and submitting a report under Section 12(3) of the Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984.
Therefore, the initiation of enquiry is invalid.
Procedural History
A complaint was lodged by Subash Hosamani against the appellant. The Karnataka Upalokayukta instituted an enquiry by order dated 17.05.2017, issued articles of charges (Annexure-B), and submitted a report under Section 12(3) on 20.02.2017. Based on that report, the State Government passed an order referring the matter for enquiry vide proceedings dated 10.05.2017 (Annexure-D). The appellant filed W.P.No.203924/2018 before the Single Judge, which was dismissed on 02.11.2018. The appellant then filed the present writ appeal.
Acts & Sections
- Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984: Section 12(3)
- Karnataka High Court Act: Section 4
