Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2010 DIGILAW 342 (KAR)

P. Mahadevaiah v. Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited, Bangalore

2010-03-18

H.N.NAGAMOHAN DAS

body2010
Judgment :- 1. In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a writ in this nature of certiorari to quash the order of suspension of petitioner from service dated 26-9-2009 as per Annexure-G 2. On 6-7-2009, the Lokayukta Police laid a trap on the complaint of one Smt, S. Leelavathi and recovered a sum of Rs. 4,000/- (Rupees four thousand only) from one Sri Sadananda Jayakanth. In the complaint given to the Lokayukta and also from the initial material gathered by the Lokayukta Police, the involvement of the petitioner came to light. Accordingly, Lokayukta Police submitted a report to the respondents dated 27/31-8-2009. The respondents acting on the report of the Lokayukta Police passed the impugned order keeping the petitioner under suspension. Hence this writ petition. 3. Heard arguments on both the sides and perused the entire writ papers. 4. It is seen from the impugned order that there is a finding specifying that prima facie there is a evidence to show the involvement of petitioner in the misconduct alleged. By considering the material placed by the Lokayukta Police-the respondents passed the impugned order. I find no justifiable ground to interfere with the impugned order at this stage. 5. However, the impugned order was passed on 26-9-2009. By 26-3-2010 the period of six months from the date of impugned order will be completing. Therefore, under Regulation 84(III) of the Karnataka Electricity Board Employees’ Service Regulations the respondents have to review the order of suspension. In the circumstances, the following. ORDER (i) The writ petition is hereby disposed directing the respondents to review the impugned order of suspension dated 26-9-2009 at Annexure-G, as per the Regulation 84(III) of the Regulations. (II) Liberty is also reserved to the petitioner to give a representation for withdrawal of the impugned order of suspension and if such a representation is given, then the respondents shall consider the same in accordance with law and as expeditiously as possible and in any event not later than four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this representation.