Martin J. Punith vs The President and Correspondent, Basel Mission Higher Education Centre

S.N. Satyanarayana, J.—The present petition is filed impugning order dated 23.04.2013 issued under Rule 33 of the Karnataka Educational Institutions (Collegiate Education) Rules, 2003 by the respondent herein initiating disciplinary enquiry against the petitioner for gross and willful misconduct for violation of Rules 41, 63 and 64 of rules cited above and also Article 72A and 157 of the Karnataka Financial Code, 1958. In the said order Shri A.P. Murari, a retired District Judge is appointed to conduct the enquiry as Enquiry Officer with a request to complete the enquiry within a period of three months from the date of commencement of the enquiry. Similarly, in the said order P. Victor Emmanuel, Principal Wardlaw Com. Pre-University College, Bellary was appointed as Presenting Officer to present the case on behalf of Management before the enquiry, with further direction to the petitioner to appear before the enquiry on the date and time shown in the notice of enquiry.

The said order is produced as Annexure - L to this petition. This order is challenged by the petitioner on the ground that the President of Basel Mission Higher Education Centre, Dharwad is not competent person for passing such order and also contending that the Basel Mission Higher Education Centre being registered under the Bombay Public Trust Act. After repeal of the Act, the said trust has become defunct. There are no trustees to the said trust and the President herein is not the person who is competent to represent the Institution and pass the order impugned.

The brief facts leading to this writ petition are as under:

The petitioner herein is admittedly an Ex-Principal of Kittel Arts College, managed and run by Basel Mission Higher Education Centre, Dharwad which is associated Member of the Karnataka Northern Diocese, C.S.I., Dharwad. It is stated that the petitioner herein while discharging the duty as Principal of Kittel Arts College was involved in several act of misappropriation in opening the bank account in his individual name and transferring the funds of the Institution to his name in the guise of utilising the same for development activities and thereafter, misappropriating the same. It is stated that Lokyukta enquiry was also conducted in this behalf. The Lokayukta Police has submitted the report which is at Annexure - R1. In the said report, it is seen that there is an observation that prima facie there appears to be misappropriation of the funds of Kittel Arts College amounting to a sum of Rs. 9,92,695/- from the account of the Principal which was maintained in Dena Bank in Savings Bank Account No. 11235. In the said report, there is also a recommendation for initiating appropriate action in accordance with law against the petitioner herein. It is seen that pursuant to the said report dated 21.10.2011, the articles of charges are issued on 16.01.2013 and subsequently, the impugned order vide Annexure - L dated 23.04.2013 is passed by the respondent which is under challenge.

Admittedly, in this proceeding the articles of charges is not under challenge. What is challenged is the appointment of Enquiry Officer and Presenting Officer and also direction to the petitioner to appear before the said enquiry which is sought to be impugned on the ground that the respondent itself is not in existence and that there are no trustees to the trust -respondent Management and President is not the competent person. In support of that the petitioner would also try to rely upon a reply received from him under the Right to Information Act, vide letter dated 19.09.2014 that Basel Mission Higher Education Centre, Dharwad is not registered with the District Register.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as contesting respondent. In this proceeding, the respondent having entered appearance have filed two documents which discloses that pursuant to the report of Lokayukta Police dated 21.10.2011, a resolution is passed by the local branch of Basel Mission Higher Education Centre, Dharwad which is being run under the Karnataka Northern Diocese, C.S.I. which is affiliated to C.S.I., Chennai. The fact of said affiliation is not in dispute. The further fact that Kittel Arts College is run by Basel Mission Higher Education Centre, Dharwad is also not in dispute.

In that view of the matter, this Court is not willing to accept the contention that in view of the Bombay Public Trust Act, coming to an end, the respondent Education Centre has become defunct is incorrect. In fact, the factual situation is that the Bombay Public Trust is repealed under Section 78(2) of Karnataka Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowment Act, 1997. Though the Bombay Public Trust Act is repealed, the Institutions which are registered under that are saved under Section 7 of the Charitable and Religious Trusts Act, 1920, as observed by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court by order dated 11.09.2008 passed in W.P. 2866/2008. Therefore, the said contention is not accepted.

However, in the instant case, the report of Lokayukta Police clearly indicate a possible involvement of petitioner herein in misappropriation of funds which were found to be kept in the Savings Bank Account in his individual name in Dena Bank. Therefore, pursuant to the observation made in the said report, the articles of charges are issued after taking a decision regarding initiation of enquiry against him in the Management Committee Meeting of respondent which has taken place on 20.09.2012 and subsequently, ratified by C.S.I., Chennai in their resolution dated 25.02.2013.

In that view of the matter, this Court felt that issuance of charge sheet and consequently passing of the order in appointing the Enquiry Officer as well as Presenting Officer on behalf of the respondent -Management to conduct the enquiry appears to be just and proper. Even otherwise, in this proceeding, the quashing of mere order appointing Enquiry Officer does not arise, unless the articles of charges are also under challenge. When the petitioner herein has not challenged the articles of charges issued against him, pursuant to the report sent by Lokayukta Police on 21.10.2011, the appointment of Enquiry Officer and Presenting Officer pursuant to that cannot be stalled.

In that view of the matter, this Court find no justifiable grounds are made out to interfere with the order of respondent dated 20.04.2003 in the proceeding with the enquiry pursuant to the report of Lokayukta Police. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed.