1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 11 TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE P.B.BAJANTHRI
AND
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE P.G.M.PATIL
WRIT PETITION Nos.201988 & 201989/2015 (S-KAT) C/w WRIT PETITION No.200065/2016 (S-KAT)
IN W.P.Nos.201988 & 201989/2015:
Between:
1. The Asst. Executive Engineer Public Works Dept., Sub-Divn., Chittapur, Kalaburagi Dist.
2. The Accountant General in Karnataka New Building PB No.5369 Bangalore- 1. … Petitioners (By Sri K.M. Ghate, AGA)
And:
1. Basamma W/o Late Basavaraj Age: 36 years, Occ: Household R/o Nalwar presently r/a Basavanagara C/o Murugesh Hotel, Opp: MB Nagar 2
PS., Sedam Road, Kalaburagi – 585 101
2. Shantha Bai W/o late Basavaraj Age: 50 years, Occ: Household R/o Farhatabad, Tq. & Dist. Kalaburagi – 585 101
3. Shivalingappa S/o late Basavaraj Age: 30 years, Occ: Nill R/o Farhatabad, Tq & Dist Kalaburagi – 585 101
Since deceased, by his LRs:
3a. Smt. Neelamma W/o Late Shivalingappa Age: 31 years Occ: Household C/o Basavaraj Gaburu Kalaburagi District
3b. Kumari Ishwariya D/o Late Shivalingappa Age: 12 years, Occ: Student C/o Basavaraj Gaburu Kalaburagi
3c. Kumara Girimallappa S/o Late Shivalingappa Age: 8 years, Occ: Student C/o Basavaraj Gaburu Kalaburagi 4. Sharanabasappa S/o late Basavaraj Age: 24 years, Occ: Nil R/o Farhatabad, Tq. & Dist. Kalaburagi – 585 101 … Respondents
(By Sri Chaitanayakumar C.M., Advocate for R1; Sri Sajjanshetty S.S., Advocate for R2, R3 (a) to (c) & R4) 3
These Writ Petitions are filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to allow the writ petition and set aside the order passed by the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore dated 22.07.2014 in application No.1184/2007 Annexure – ‘C’ and dismiss the Application No.1184/2007 filed by the respondent before the learned Karnataka Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore Annexure-C.
IN W.P.No.200065/2016: Between:
1. Smt. Shantabai W/o Late Basavaraj Age: 50 years, Occ: Household R/o: Farhatabad village Tq: Dist: Kalaburagi
2. Shivalingappa Since deceased by L.Rs.
(a) Smt. Neelamma W/o Late Shivalingappa Age: 31 years, Occ: Household
(b) Kumari Aishwarya D/o Late Shivalingappa Age: 11 years, Minor Occ: Student
(c) Girimallappa S/o Late Shivalingappa Age: 9 years, Occ: Student Both Petitioner Nos.2 (b) & 2 (c) are minors U/Guardian Of their natural mother petitioner 2 (a) 4
3. Sharanabasappa S/o Late Basavaraj Age: 24 years, Occ: Agriculture
All Residents of Farhatabad Village Tq: Dist: Kalaburagi – 585 101
… Petitioners (By Sri S.S. Sajjanashetty, Advocate)
And:
1. Basamma W/o Late Basavaraj Age: 44 years, Occ: Nalwar Presently R/o Basavanagar C/o Murugesh Hotel, Opp: M.B. Nagar Police Station, Sedam Road Kalaburagi, Tq. Dist: Kalaburagi – 585 101
3. The Accountant General in Karnataka New Building B.B. No.5369, Bangalore – 560 001 Represented by Senior Accounts Officer
4. The Asst. Executive Engineer Public Works Dept. Sub Division Chittapur, Tq. Chittapur Dist: Kalaburagi – 585 101
… Respondents
(By Sri K.M. Ghate, AGA for R2 & R3; Notice not ordered in respect of R1)
This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of certiorari, by setting aside/quashing the Order dated 22.7.2014, passed by the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal Bangalore in Application No.1184 of 2007, vide Annexure-E and etc. 5
These Petitions coming on for admission this day, P.B.BAJANTHRI, J ., made the following:
ORDER
For the reasons stated in the application and the affidavit, I.A.No.2/2016 filed in W.P.No.200065/2016 for production of additional documents is allowed.
2. With the consent of the counsels for the parties, matter taken up for final disposal.
3. These two writ petitions are filed by the State and respondent No.1 in Application No.1184/2007 decided on 22.07.2014. The learned counsel for the petitioner – Shanta Bai submitted that Basamma filed application before the Tribunal seeking certain relief relating to family pension in Application No.1184/2007.
The application was dismissed for non-prosecution on
08.04.2010 and it was restored on an application for recalling on 16.09.2010. Thereafter, Smt. Shanta Bai was not notified for appearance after restoration of 6
Application No.1184/2007. Thus, the Tribunal proceeded to pass order in Application No.1184/2007 without hearing the petitioner – Shanta Bai.
4. The State questioned the validity of the
Tribunal’s order dated 22.07.2014 on the sole contention that Rule 28 of the Karnataka Civil Services
(Conduct) Rules, 1966 has not been taken into consideration while deciding Application No.1184/2007 by the Tribunal.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
Undisputedly, petitioner – Shanta Bai has not been heard in Application No.1184/2007 after restoration of the same on 16.09.2010. Contention of learned
Additional Government Advocate that Rule 28 of the
Conduct Rules has not been considered by the Tribunal while allowing Application No.1184/2007. It is to be examined with reference to applicability clause of the
Rules. For the reason that the aforesaid statutory rule is 7 attracted in respect of Government servants. In the present case, neither Basamma nor Shanta Bai are
Government servants. They are claiming certain family benefits in respect of deceased Government servant late
Basavaraj. Accordingly, petition filed by the State in
W.P.Nos.201988 & 201989/2015 stand dismissed, since Karnataka Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1966 is not attracted in the case.
6. Insofar as W.P.No.200065/2016 filed by
Shanta Bai is concerned, as is evident from the records, she has not been heard while disposing Application
No.1184/2007 on 22.07.2014. Accordingly, order dated
22.07.2014 is set aside. The matter is remanded to the
Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal to decide
Application No.1184/2007 afresh. Parties are hereby directed to appear before the Tribunal on 08.04.2019.
Parties are hereby permitted to furnish additional documents, if any, before the Tribunal at the 8 earliest. Tribunal is hereby directed to make necessary endeavor to decide the Application No.1184/2007 within a reasonable period of three months from the date of receipt of this order.
Sd/- JUDGE
Sd/- JUDGE swk