Disciplinary Authority Can Impose Penalty On Erring Govt Official Lesser Than That Recommended By Lokayukta: Karnataka High Court

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna rejected the petition filed by the Karnataka Lokayuktha questioning an order dated 06.09.2021 by which the second respondent (Chandrashekhar) was imposed a penalty, which falls short of a recommendation made by it for imposition of particular penalty.

The bench said “The power of the disciplinary authority to exercise discretion cannot be taken away merely because a recommendation is made by the Lokayukta for imposition of particular penalty.”

Chandrashekhar was an accused in an alleged case of accepting and receiving a bribe of Rs.700, in the year 2009. He was acquitted in the matter on the ground that there was no work pending with him, for him to demand or accept a bribe.

Simultaneously, the report under Sub-Section 3 of Section 12 of the Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984, was prepared and furnished to the Government, seeking entrustment of departmental enquiry to the Lokayukta under Rule 14A of the Karnataka Civil Services (CCA) Rules. The government vide order dated 22.07.2011, entrusted the inquiry to the hands of the Lokayukta.

The Lokayukta conducts an enquiry and holds that the allegations against the second respondent are proved and accordingly submits an enquiry report, recommending imposition of penalty of compulsory retirement from service against him. On receipt of the recommendation of imposition of such penalty, the disciplinary authority, after on consideration of the material placed before it, resolves to impose a penalty of reversion in grade of the petitioner instead of compulsory retirement.

The Counsel for Lokayuktha contended that “Once the recommendation is made, the reduction of penalty can only happen in accordance with law. There are no reasons indicated as to why the penalty against the second respondent is reduced to that of reversion from what was recommended.”

The Government opposed the plea saying “It is the discretion vested with the disciplinary authority to impose a penalty or otherwise and the petitioner–Lokayukta cannot be considered to be an aggrieved person against the orders passed by the disciplinary authority imposing a particular penalty.”

The court made reference to judgement passed by it in W.P.No.12733/2021 which came to be disposed on 25.01.2022, wherein it was held that Lokayuktha has no locus to challenge the decision of the Cabinet. Thus it had dismissed the petition filed by the Lokayuktha on account of lack of locus, as they are not, and cannot be the person aggrieved.

Following which it held “In the light of the afore-quoted order passed by this Court and statutory framework of the Act, the power of the disciplinary authority to exercise discretion cannot be taken away merely because a recommendation is made by the Lokayukta for imposition of particular penalty.”

It added “I do not find any warrant to interfere in the case at hand, in the peculiar circumstances.”

Case Title: Karnataka Lokayuktha And State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 7122 OF 2022

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (kar) 90

Date of Order: 08-02-2023

Appearance: Advocate Venkatesh S. Arbatti, for petitioner.

AGA M. Vinod Kumar, for R1.