Bowring Hospital wall collapse: Karnataka High Court quashes engineer’s suspension

The petitioner approached the court after the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal refused to grant an interim stay of the suspension order in its order dated May 6.

Senior advocate P S Rajagopal, appearing for the petitioner, argued that to suspend an officer, the requirement under Rule 10 (1) of the Karnataka Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules 1957 must be satisfied. He added that, in this case, clause D of the said rule, which requires a prima facie evidence of gross negligence of duty, is being invoked.

“However, nothing on record is placed indicating there is any prima facie evidence of gross dereliction against the petitioner,” he said.

He informed the court further that the public works department has constituted an inquiry team to conduct a local investigation. Another PWD committee will technically examine the wall collapse and submit a report within seven days, he added.

Rajgopal said, “Without the said report being on record, implicating the petitioner, the petitioner could not have been suspended. Even if disciplinary proceedings are contemplated, it can only be after the committee report is received and only under the powers under the rules can be exercised.”

The government counsel opposed the grant of any relief by submitting, “The fact that the compound wall has fallen and it is the petitioner who was the executive engineer of the said location is prima facie evidence enough for his implication. That fact of the wall collapse is prima facie sufficient for suspending the petitioner.”

The government counsel also pointed out that the petitioner was responsible for ensuring that the contractors remove debris kept near the wall, as it could have led to the collapse.

The bench said, “There has to be prima facie evidence of gross dereliction of duty ‘against him’ (petitioner). The usage of the word him would indicate that such evidence is required in so far as the officer who is proposed to be suspended and not the event itself.”

“Two committees have been appointed; it is for the committees to submit their report, indicating if there is any gross dereliction of duty by the petitioner and if that be so the respondent would be able to exercise its powers under Rule 10 (1) (d). At present, we are of the opinion that such power could not have been exercised without application of mind recording a prima facie evidence of gross dereliction against the petitioner.”

The court thus set aside the suspension order and the tribunal order, allowing the government to initiate action if required after receiving the committee reports.

7 killed in wall collapse during heavy rain

On April 29, seven people, including two children, were killed after a portion of the compound wall collapsed during heavy rain. The victims also included street vendors as well as two women from Kerala who were on a leisure trip to Bengaluru.

During an inspection, officials told Chief Minister Siddaramaiah that mud extracted as part of ongoing construction work at the hospital was dumped near the wall.