AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
A.N. Venugopala Gowda, J.—Petitioner joined services of the erstwhile Karnataka Electricity Board on 01.07.1975. He was appointed as Assistant Store Keeper at Pandavapura sub-division. He was put in charge of stores as a ''Store Keeper''. He handed over the charge of Stores to one Sri Subbegowda on 04.08.2008. Petitioner was served with an order of suspension on 05.11.2008. However, he was reinstated to duty on 19.05.2010 and was transferred to Nagamangala Division as Overseer. A charge-sheet was served on the petitioner on 22.10.2010, alleging misappropriation of store materials, when he was in charge of stores at Pandavapura Division, as ''Stores Officer''. Petitioner submitted his explanation to the Superintending Engineer (Electrical) who was shown as the Disciplinary Authority. Petitioner having attained the age of superannuation on 31.05.2011 was relieved from service. CHESCOM issued notice to the petitioner and appointed Sri M.S. Nataraja Murthy, retired District & Sessions Judge to enquire into the charges leveled against the petitioner and another Store Officer. The said enquiry Officer having submitted the report, a final show cause notice dated 17.01.2012 was issued on the petitioner, to show cause as to why penalty should not be imposed on him as per Rule 9(viii) of the KEB (C & D) Rules. The petitioner submitted a representation to the said show cause notice on 28.01.2012. Disciplinary Authority by means of an order dated 08.05.2012 imposed the following punishments on the petitioner:
(i) stoppage of pension for the rest of his service;
(ii) treating the period of suspension as leave to the extent of admissible leave to his credit and the rest of the period of suspension as leave on loss of pay;
(iii) Initiation of proceedings for recovery of Rs. 68,33,140/- after disposal of the criminal case registered by Pandavapura Police Station.
Feeling aggrieved by the said penalty order, the petitioner has filed an appeal on 01.08.2012 before the Chief Engineer (Electrical), CHESCOM, Mysore. The appeal having not been decided despite the demand made by way of legal notice dated 24.03.2013, this writ petition was filed on 08.08.2013, to quash the penalty order dated 08.05.2012 as at Annexure-R and to grant the consequential relief''s.
Heard learned advocates on both sides and perused the writ record.
Petitioner has preferred an appeal vide Annexure-S on 01.08.2012 as against the penalty order vide Annexure-R. The Appellate Authority ought to have decided the appeal by now. I am unable to understand the reasons for the delay in deciding the appeal, statutorily provided to an aggrieved employee. The delay in deciding the appeal would certainly cause prejudice to the petitioner who has been saddled with penalty of forfeiture of pension for rest of his life apart from other punishments. In the circumstances, the Appellate Authority i.e., the 2nd respondent should be directed to decide the appeal with expedition.
In the result, writ petition is allowed in part. 2nd respondent is directed to decide the appeal of the petitioner vide Annexure-S, with expedition and within a period of three months from the date a copy of this order becomes available to the respondents.
Needless to observe that the petitioner shall render necessary co-operation to the Appellate Authority, by appearing on all hearing dates, so as to enable the Appellate Authority to decide the appeal within the stipulated period.
All contentions raised as against the order of penalty dated 08.05.2012 vide Annexure-R are kept open for consideration by the Appellate Authority.