Karnataka HC clears BBMP engineer of inaction charges, says he followed tribunal order
The Karnataka High Court quashed an enquiry and charge sheet against BBMP Assistant Engineer BC Sandeep, stating that officials cannot be faulted for not acting on unauthorized constructions when a court-ordered status quo is in place.
BENGALURU: An officer of the state is required to abide by the orders of courts and tribunals. If there is an order from such a court or tribunal restraining the officer from performing any particular action, the non-performance thereof cannot be said to be a dereliction of duty, the Karnataka High Court has observed in a recent order.
Justice
Suraj Govindaraj
made this observation while quashing the order of entrustment of enquiry to
Upa Lokayukta
in March 2016 and the charge sheet issued against petitioner BC Sandeep, an Assistant Engineer with the BBMP, in July 2016.
The case against the petitioner was that in 2013, he, along with other officials of the BBMP, failed to take action against an unauthorised construction in 7th Cross, Jayanagar 1st Block, in terms of the
Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act
, despite the issuance of provisional and confirmatory orders in 2013.
Though his name was in the promotion list, it was not considered, citing a pending enquiry taken up suo motu by the Lokayukta.
Challenging the orders issued against him, Sandeep argued that during the three years he worked, there was an interim order of status quo issued by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal on November 25, 2013, based on an appeal filed by the owner of the said property.
Hence, he and his superiors could not take any further action vis-a-vis the unauthorised construction/deviation in the subject property. He further claimed that he is duty-bound to follow the orders issued by the courts/tribunals as an official.
On the other hand, the
Lokayukta
argued that the proceedings against the petitioner needed to be continued as no action was initiated in the matter when violations were noticed.
After perusing the materials on record, Justice Suraj Govindaraj noted that both on the date of entrustment of the enquiry to Upa Lokayukta and on the date of issuance of the charge sheet, the interim order of the
KAT
was in operation. Hence, the petitioner could not take further action in pursuance of the confirmation order issued under Section 321(3) of the KMC Act, and the same cannot be held against him.
Quashing the proceedings against the petitioner, the judge clarified that the court has not expressed any opinion regarding the other seven persons against whom a charge sheet has been filed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
HC to TN: Issue GO for ‘No caste, no religion' certificates
Chennai: Madras high court has directed the Tamil Nadu govt to issue an appropriate order enabling its revenue department to issue 'No Caste No Religion' certificates to applicants. The court noted that citizens claiming such certificates is laudable and, in the long run, would promote the prohibition of caste-based discrimination. It would also serve as an eye-opener for like-minded individuals, according to Justice M S Ramesh and Justice N Senthilkumar. H Santhosh approached the court seeking a direction to the Thirupathur collector to issue such a certificate. On Feb 22, 2024, a single judge of the court dismissed his plea. Aggrieved, he moved the present appeal, submitting that he intends to raise his children in a casteless and religion-free society. He declared he never claimed any benefit from the govt under caste or religious reservation and does not intend to claim any benefits in the future. Objecting to the appeal, the govt contended that tahsildars are not empowered to issue such a certificate. In response, the court pointed out three similar certificates issued by tahsildars of Tirupathur, Coimbatore, and Ambattur in 2019 and 2022. The court stated that even when there is a constitutional mandate under Article 25, the revenue authorities cannot evade this constitutional obligation by citing the absence of any particular rule or GO. Accordingly, the court called upon the govt to pass the necessary GO, with specific instructions to the revenue authorities to positively entertain applications seeking the grant of a certificate of "No Caste No Religion." While the Constitution of India prohibits caste-based discrimination, the bench added that caste and religion still play a significant role in social life, politics, education, and employment through reservation policies.
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Kaleshwaram project irregularities: KCR seeks in-camera hearing, becomes first ex-CM to appear before probe panel
Hyderabad: In a first for the state, former chief minister K Chandrasekhar Rao was cross-examined by the Justice (retd) PC Ghose one-man commission in connection with the Kaleshwaram project, during an in camera proceeding held at BRKR Bhavan on Wednesday. The hearing was conducted privately at KCR's request, citing health concerns and his preference to avoid a public setting during the session. KCR arrived at the commission's office around 11 am and formally sought permission for a closed-door hearing. Acting on his request, the commission cleared the courtroom of media personnel and several officials before commencing the proceedings. This marks the first time the Ghose commission—tasked with probing structural issues in the Kaleshwaram Lift Irrigation Scheme—has held an in camera hearing since it began its inquiry. The commission has so far examined over 100 individuals, including engineers, serving and former irrigation secretaries, ex-chief secretaries, and political leaders like former ministers T Harish Rao and Eatala Rajender. Senior officials said that KCR is the first former chief minister to appear before an inquiry commission both in the history of Telangana and in united Andhra Pradesh. Anticipating his appearance, thousands of BRS workers and leaders gathered outside the BRKR Bhavan, resulting in considerable commotion. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 5 Books Warren Buffett Wants You to Read In 2025 Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List Undo Police personnel had a tough time managing the crowd and ensuring security in and around the premises. KCR was accompanied by Harish Rao, former ministers Mohammed Mahmood Ali and Vemula Prashanth Reddy, MLAs like Bandari Laxma Reddy, MPs Joginapally Santosh Kumar and Vaddiraju Ravichandra, and party leader RS Praveen Kumar. Notably, BRS MLC K Kavitha reached KCR's Erravelli farmhouse prior to his departure but did not proceed to the commission office, as entry was strictly restricted during the proceedings.
The Hindu
3 hours ago
- The Hindu
Karnataka High Court refuses to quash criminal case against assistant professor on allegation of sexually assaulting eight girls during his daughter's birthday party
The High Court of Karnataka has refused to quash criminal proceedings against a 44-year-old assistant professor of a premier research institute in the city on the allegation of sexually assaulting eight minor girls at the birthday party of his nine-year-old daughter in 2018. The petitioner-accused had questioned the proceedings before the trial, citing violation of procedure, particularly the manner in which the magistrate had recorded the statement of victim girls under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). It was argued that Section 25 of the CrPC mandates that recording of statement by the magistrate under Section 164 of the CrPC should be as spoken by the child, but the statements of the victim children, recorded by the magistrate, were verbatim the same. However, Justice M. Nagaprasanna said that 'the manner of recording of evidence by the learned magistrate would not take away the rigour of the allegation of every child.' On contention that the magistrate had not audio-video recorded the statements of the victim children, the court said that though recording through electronic mode is desirable, omission of it cannot derail the proceedings at this stage as the petitioner-accused can raise this question during the trial. Background of case It was stated in the complaint that the petitioner-accused had touched the children inappropriately during the birthday party on the pretext of playing some game by switching off the lights. The victim children had complained about the incident to their parents, who later lodged the complaint with the police after arguing with the petitioner-accused. However, the petitioner-accused had denied the allegation and claimed that some children preferred to play the 'dark room game' and he had to enter the room as one child had poked the eye of another. The petitioner-accused also claimed that the complainant, who led the other parents, had some axe to grind with him and hence the complaint was registered only to harass him.
