BABU FATRUSAB vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANR

Court
Karnataka High Court

- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10472-DB
WP No. 202372 of 2024


CNR: KAHC030051522024




IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA


KALABURAGI BENCH

TH
DATED THIS THE 29 DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI

AND

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMANYA RANGARAO

WRIT PETITION NO. 202372 OF 2024 (S-KAT)

BETWEEN:

SRI. BABU FATRUSAB
S/O LATE FATRUSAB @ PHATRUSAB,
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
RETIRED AS DEPUTY DISTRICT PROJECT
CO-ORDINATOR, SAMAGRA SHIKSHANA,
OFFICE OF THE
DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC
INSTRUCTIONS, BIDAR,
RESIDING AT NO. 18/03/98,
SANGAMESHWAR COLONY,
CHIDRI ROAD, BIDAR-585403.
…PETITIONER

(BY SRI VARDHAN SHENOY. K., AND
SRI RAVI B.PATIL, ADVOCATES)

AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION
AND LITERACY,
MS BUILDING, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU-560001.









Digitally signed
by SHIVALEELA
D UDAGI
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA

- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10472-DB
WP No. 202372 of 2024


CNR: KAHC030051522024


2. THE KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR,
M.S. BUILDING,
DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU-560001.
…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI VEERANAGOUDA MALIPATIL, AGA FOR R1;
SRI GOURISH S.KHASHAMPUR, ADV. FOR R2)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SET
ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 18.01.2024 PASSED BY
THE HON’BLE KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
AT KALABURAGI IN APPLICATION NO.20151/2023 (ANNEXURE-
A) AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW APPLICATION NO.20151/2023
AS PRAYED FOR BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE HON’BLE
TRIBUNAL (ANNEXURE-E) IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND
ETC.

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
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMANYA RANGARAO

- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10472-DB
WP No. 202372 of 2024


CNR: KAHC030051522024


ORAL ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI)
The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging the
order dated 18.01.2024 passed in Application No.20151/2023
by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, Kalaburagi (for
short, ‘the Tribunal’).


2. Brief facts giving rise to filing of this petition are as
follows:
The petitioner was initially appointed on 09.09.1986 as a
High School Assistant Teacher/Head Master of Model Primary
School. One Sri.K.S.Raviraj, lodged a complaint before the
Karnataka Lokayukta against the Deputy Director of Public
Instructions, Bidar, and four others, including the petitioner,
alleging that the private educational institutions of Bidar District
are collecting donations illegally from the students and private
coaching classes and educational institutions are run by the
unauthorized persons.

3. Pursuant to the complaint submitted by
Sri.K.S.Raviraj, the investigation was conducted under Section
9 of the Karnataka Lokayukta Act and report was submitted on

- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10472-DB
WP No. 202372 of 2024


CNR: KAHC030051522024


12.04.2013 by the Police Inspector/Investigating Officer stating
that the Department of Public Instructions, Bidar has failed to
take action against the educational institutions. Thereafter,
respondent No.2, without conducting preliminary enquiry and
investigation as contemplated under Sections 8 and 9 of the
Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984, proceeded to issue a report
under Section 12(3) of the Karnataka Lokayukta Act, alleging
that the petitioner and others have committed misconduct.
Respondent No.1 taken decision without notifying the
petitioner, proceeded to entrust enquiry to respondent No.2
under Rule 14-A of the KCS (CC&A) Rules, which is in gross
violation of Section 12(4) of the Karnataka Lokayukta Act,
1984.


4. The Karnataka Lokayukta has submitted a report
stating that the charges leveled against the petitioner and
others are proved. The competent authority issued a show
cause notice along with enquiry report to the petitioner, and
the petitioner has submitted a reply to the second show cause
notice. The competent authority has passed an order of
punishment dated 31.01.2022, imposing penalty of withholding

- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10472-DB
WP No. 202372 of 2024


CNR: KAHC030051522024


10% of pension for the period of five years. The petitioner
aggrieved by the order dated 31.01.2022, approached the
Tribunal in Application No.20151/2023. The Tribunal dismissed
the application. Hence, this writ petition.


5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner
appearing through video conferencing and learned Additional
Government Advocate for respondent No.1 and learned Spl.PP
appearing for Lokayukta.


6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
complaint was lodged pertaining to the year 2011. The articles
of charge has framed pertaining to year 2012-13. The articles
of charge issued to the petitioner is not in terms of the
complaint submitted by the complainant. The said aspect was
not considered neither by the enquiry officer, nor competent
authority. The said aspect was overlooked by the Tribunal and
committed an error in passing the impugned order. He submits
that impugned order passed by the Tribunal is arbitrary and
erroneous. Hence, prays to allow the writ petition.

- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10472-DB
WP No. 202372 of 2024


CNR: KAHC030051522024


Per contra
7. , learned Additional Government
Advocate supported the impugned order. He submits that
enquiry was conducted and charges leveled against the
petitioner are proved and competent authority has rightly
passed an order of punishment. Hence, on these grounds, he
prays to dismiss the writ petition.


8. Perused the records and considered the
submissions of the learned counsel for the parties.


9. It is an undisputed fact that the petitioner was
appointed as a High School Assistant Teacher and he was
promoted as a Block Education Officer. While, he was working
as a BEO, Humnabad, Bidar District, during the said period, one
Sri.K.S.Raviraj, has lodged a complaint before the Karnataka
Lokayukta against the DDPI and four others, alleging that they
have paid the salary to the unaided private educational
institutions, which they were not entitled. Pursuant to the
complaint submitted that Sri.K.S.Raviraj, the Investigating
Officer has submitted a report on 12.04.2013. Respondent
No.2, without conducting a preliminary enquiry and

- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10472-DB
WP No. 202372 of 2024


CNR: KAHC030051522024


investigation as contemplated under Sections 8 and 9 of the
Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984 has proceeded to issue report
under Section 12(3) of the Act, alleging that the petitioner and
others have mis-conducted as per Rule 3(i) of the KCS
(Conduct) Rules, 1966. The competent authority has entrusted
enquiry to the respondent No.2 under Section 14-A of the KCS
(CCA) Rules.


10. Admittedly, from the perusal of the records, it
clearly discloses that complaint was lodged by the complainant
pertaining to the academic year 2011, wherein articles of
charges were issued to the petitioner pertaining to the
academic year 2012-13. The Articles of charge issued to the
petitioner is not in terms of the complaint submitted by the
complainant. The said aspect was not considered by the
Tribunal without considering the said aspect, has recorded its
finding that the enquiry was conducted and charges were
proved against the petitioner and others, and the competent
authority has rightly passed an order. The Tribunal without
considering the entire records produced by the parties, has
passed the impugned order without application of mind that the

- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10472-DB
WP No. 202372 of 2024


CNR: KAHC030051522024


complaint was in respect of the year 2011 and articles of
charge were issued for the academic year 2012-13.


11. Further, from the perusal of the contents of the
complaint, which does not disclose that there is specific
allegations against the petitioner, even the said fact was not
considered by the enquiry officer or the competent authority
and also the Tribunal.


12. In view of the above discussions, the impugned
order passed by the Tribunal is arbitrary and erroneous. Thus,
we inclined to interfere with the impugned order. Accordingly,
we proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
allowed
(i) The writ petition is .

(ii) The impugned order dated 18.01.2024 passed
in Application No.20151/2023 is hereby set
aside. Consequently, the Application
No.20151/2023 is allowed.

- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10472-DB
WP No. 202372 of 2024


CNR: KAHC030051522024



(iii) The impugned order dated 31.01.2022 issued
by respondent No.1 vide Annexure-A6 is
hereby quashed.

.


Sd/-
(ASHOK S. KINAGI)
JUDGE


Sd/-
(SUBRAMANYA RANGARAO)
JUDGE

SDU
LIST NO.: 2 SL NO.: 19