Presumption Of Correctness Of Judicial Records Not Absolute And Can Be Rebutted By Direct Evidence: Kerala High Court on Married Daughter Cannot Challenge Partition After 21-Year Slumber If She Had Knowledge: Madhya Pradesh High Court Kerala High Court Orders Immediate Suspension Of Lakshadweep CJM For Allegedly Forging Witness Deposition To Convict Accused Supreme Court Bars Post-Divorce Maintenance Claims When Wife Voluntarily Waived Maintenance In Settlement Agreement Advocate Is An Officer Of Court, Not Mere Agent Of Client: Allahabad High Court Distinguishes Between Active Concealment & Statement In Ignorance, Slaps Cost On Litigants For Misleading Bench Cannot Summon Accused Mechanically On Protest Petition Without Assigning Justifiable Reasons: Andhra Pradesh High Court Increment Not A Bounty: Allahabad High Court Rules Public Holiday Cannot Delay Pay Hike For Teachers Joining Next Working Day Paying Taxes Or Utility Connections Confer No Legal Ownership Over Govt Land': Andhra Pradesh High Court Orders Demolition Of Encroachment 'Cannot Compel Public Authority To Collect Data From Private Bodies': Bombay High Court Quashes CIC Orders Directing SEBI To Procure BSE Records Under RTI Act Section 10 CPC Cannot Stay Previously Instituted Title Suit Pending Subsequent Probate Case; Inherent Powers Under Section 151 Inapplicable When Probate Dismissed: Calcutta High Court Mere Phone Calls Without Transcripts No Ground For Murder Conspiracy: Delhi High Court Clear Violation Of Section 42 NDPS Act': Gujarat High Court Holds Failure To Record Secret Info In Writing Fatal When Police Officer Had Time To Act JK High Court Quashes Criminal Case Against Cop Accused Of Threatening Advocate Over Phone Call Without Prior Sanction Under Section 197 CrPC Custody Unwarranted For Mere Formalities Once Weapon Is Recovered: Kerala High Court Grants Regular Bail In BNS Axe Attack Case Circumstances Of Crime Can Be Assessed During Trial: High Court Upholds Trial Of Minor As Adult Under JJ Act In Murder Case Statutory Deposit Under Order 21 Rule 89 CPC Is A Sine Qua Non; Litigant Cannot Stall Auction Sale By Merely Blaming Counsel: Madras High Court Ban Junk Food Within 50 Metres Of Schools: Rajasthan High Court Takes Suo Moto Cognizance To Enforce FSSAI Norms, Protect Children From Obesity

Grants Relief to Employee for Delayed Departmental Action: Financial Loss and Mental Agony Merit Just Compensation:  High Court of Karnataka

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment reinforcing the rights of employees under suspension, the High Court of Karnataka, presided over by the Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum, delivered a landmark verdict in Writ Petition No.16678 of 2018 (S-RES), favoring petitioner Sri T K Srinivasa.

The judgment, dated January 22, 2024, ruled in favor of the petitioner against the Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited (KPTCL), granting relief in the form of interest on delayed payment of salary and the difference in salary from the date of suspension.

Justice Magadum, in his observation, noted the unwarranted delay and the procedural lapses on the part of the respondent corporation. "The delay in initiating a departmental enquiry and further delay in payment of arrears of salary post enquiry Officer’s findings reflects a clear violation of petitioner’s right to timely compensation," Justice Magadum observed.

The petitioner, Sri T K Srinivasa, challenged the endorsement dated 05.08.2017, which declined his request for interest on the delayed payment of salary and difference of salary during his suspension period. The petition was filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India.

The Court meticulously reviewed the sequence of events leading to the petitioner's prolonged suspension since 07.12.1998. The court emphasized the hardship and financial prejudice suffered by the petitioner due to the delay in initiating the departmental enquiry and subsequent payments after exoneration.

In a strong statement underlining the importance of fair treatment of employees, the Court declared, "The petitioner’s protracted ordeal, including suspension, removal from service and delay in initiating enquiry aligns with Court’s recognition that such circumstances warrant just compensation."

Upholding the petitioner's plea, the Court ordered the quashing of the impugned endorsement and directed the respondent corporation to pay interest on the delayed payment of the salary difference at the rate of 6% per annum.

This judgment is a significant stride in safeguarding the rights of employees under suspension and emphasizes the need for timely and fair administrative processes. Legal experts view this ruling as a precedent for future cases involving undue delays and procedural lapses in disciplinary proceedings against employees.

Date of Decision: 22nd January 2024

SRI T K SRINIVASA VS THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KPTCL

 

Latest Legal News