Karnataka High Court upholds dismissal of government typist who took a bribe of Rs 300

Bengaluru: The High Court of Karnataka has allowed the state government's petition over dismissing a woman typist in the Commercial Taxes Department who was caught taking a bribe of Rs 300.

The court would not get jurisdiction to substitute the punishment unless it records that the punishment imposed is disproportionate to the gravity of the charge, which shocks the conscience of the court, a division bench comprising Justices S G Pandit and C M Poonacha noted this while allowing the government's petition.

The government challenged the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal's (KSAT) January 4, 2018, order to substitute the punishment of dismissal of service with compulsory retirement for the typist, H S Kanthi.

Kanthi and Sampath Rao S Bommannavar, a Commercial Tax Officer, faced charges of graft. Rao was accused of receiving Rs 2,000 and Kanthi Rs 300 from Ganesh Shetty, the complainant.

Following an enquiry, Kanthi was dismissed from service on July 24, 2014, with the government holding that she had failed to maintain absolute integrity and devotion to duty, and committed misconduct under Rule 3(1)(i) to (iii) read with Rule 16 of Karnataka Civil Service (Conduct) Rules, 1966.

On Kanthi's application, the KSAT substituted the punishment with compulsory retirement, considering that she was a woman who had put in 11 years and 5 months of service and that a lenient view should be taken.

The state government petitioned the high court against the tribunal's order, contending that it committed an error in substituting the punishment in a proven misconduct of accepting illegal gratification, that too without recording any finding that the punishment imposed was too excessive.

The division bench noted that the enquiry officer in his report had categorically recorded that Kanthi admitted, both in her defence statement and first explanation soon after the trap, that she had received money from the complainant and she pleaded excuse by admitting guilt.

The bench further noticed that in criminal proceedings, the petitioner was acquitted of the charges only on the grounds that demand and acceptance were not proved, but the criminal court found that she had received Rs 300 and kept it in her vanity bag.

"The tribunal, having observed that demanding and receiving bribes is a serious social morality and it needs to be dealt with firmly, could not have substituted the punishment of dismissal with that of compulsory retirement. Further, as held by the Hon’ble Apex Court, the tribunal, without recording as to whether the punishment of dismissal for a proven charge of accepting bribe is disproportionate or whether it shocks the conscience of the court, could not have substituted the punishment," the bench said.