Karnataka High Court
Nandeesha Kumar vs The State Of Karnataka on 10 March, 2026
Author: S.Vishwajith Shetty
Bench: S.Vishwajith Shetty
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2250
WP No. 200998 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
WRIT PETITION NO. 200998 OF 2025 (S-RES)
BETWEEN:
NANDEESHA KUMAR
S/O RAJSHEKHARSWAMI,
AGE: 30 YEARS,
OCC: BAREFOOT TECHNICIAN (BFT),
AT BYAGWAT AND NAKKUNDI GRAM PANCHAYATS,
R/O. BYAGWAT VILLAGE, TQ. MANVI,
DIST.RAICHUR-584123.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI R. J. BHUSARE, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed by AND:
SWETA KULKARNI
Location: HIGH
COURT OF 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
KARNATAKA
REP. BY IT'S PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND
PANCHAYAT RAJ, VIDHAN SOUDHA,
BENGALORE-560001.
2. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
ZILLA PANCHAYAT RAICHUR,
TQ. AND DIST. BIDAR-585101.
3. THE TALUKA EXECUTIVE OFFICER
TALUK PANCHAYAT MANVI,
TQ. MANVI, DIST. RAICHUR-584123.
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2250
WP No. 200998 of 2025
HC-KAR
4. THE PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER
GRAM PANCHAYAT BYAGWAT, TQ. MANVI,
DIST. RAICHUR-584123.
5. BASAVARAJ NAKKUNDI
AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC: SOCIAL WORK,
R/O.BYAGWAT VILLAGE, TQ.MANVI,
DIST. RAICHUR-584123.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI VEERANAGOUDA M. BIRADAR, AGA FOR R1;
SRI GOURISH S. KHASHAMPUR, ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R4;
V/O DTD. 10.03.2026 NOTICE TO R5 IS DISPENSED WITH)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO, A)
ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE
ENQUIRY REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 TO
THE OFFICE OF RESPONDENT NO.2 DATED 03-02-2025
BEARING NO. ¸ÀA:vÁ¥ÀAªÀiÁ/GSÁAiÉÆÃ/©J¥sïn/2024-25/915 AT
ANNEXURE-L; B) ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI
QUASHING THE IMPUGNED LETTER DATED 19-02-2025 AND
28-02-2025 AT ANNEXURE-M AND M1 ISSUED BY
RESPONDENT NO.2 AND 3 RESPECTIVELY BEARING NO.
¸ÀA:f¥ÀAgÁ/GSÁAiÉÆÃ-3/¹§âA¢/©J¥sïn /²PÀ/æ 2024-25 AND BEARING NO.
¸ÀA:vÁ¥ÀAªÀiÁ/GSÁAiÉÆÃ/©J¥sïn/²PÀ/æ 2024-25/1008 RESPECTIVELY; C)
ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE
IMPUGNED RELIEVE ORDER VIDE NO.
GRA.PAM.BYA/B.F.T/BI.MA.KU/2024-25 DATED 17-03-2025 AT
ANNEXURE-N ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.4. D) PASS ANY
SUCH OTHER RELIEF/S AS DEEMED FIT BY THIS COURT ON
THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2250
WP No. 200998 of 2025
HC-KAR
ORAL ORDER
This Writ Petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is filed seeking for the reliefs:
"a) Issue writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the enquiry report submitted by the respondent no.3 to the office of respondent no.2 dated 03-02-2025 bearing No. ¸ÀA:vÁ¥ÀAªÀiÁ/GSÁAiÉÆÃ/©J¥sïn/2024-25/915 at Annexure-L;
b) Issue writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned letter dated 19-02-2025 and 28-02-2025 at Annexure-M and M1 issued by respondent No.2 and 3 respectively bearing no. ¸ÀA:f¥ÀAgÁ/GSÁAiÉÆÃ-
3/¹§âA¢/©J¥sïn /²PÀ/æ 2024-25 and bearing no. ¸ÀA:vÁ¥ÀAªÀiÁ/GSÁAiÉÆÃ/©J¥sïn/²PÀ/æ 2024-25/1008 respectively;
c) Issue writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned relieve order vide no.
gra.pam.bya/b.f.t/bi.ma.ku/ 2024-25 dated 17-03- 2025 at Annexure-N issued by respondent No.4.
d) Pass any such other relief/s as deemed fit by this court on the facts and circumstances of the case."
2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
3. Petitioner claims that he was appointed for the post of Barefoot Technician in respondent No.3 - Gram Panchayat vide order at Annexure-A dated 28.11.2012. It appears that respondent No.5 herein had submitted a complaint to respondent No.2 on 13.11.2024 alleging that petitioner was demanding illegal gratification for the -4- NC: 2026:KHC-K:2250 WP No. 200998 of 2025 HC-KAR purpose of clearing the bills for the work done under the MGNREGA scheme. It was also alleged that petitioner was misbehaving with the MGNREGA labourers. It appears that respondent No.2 had directed respondent No.3 to consider the complaint of respondent No.5 and initiate appropriate action against the petitioner. Respondent No.3 in turn had issued communication dated 27.11.2024 at Annexure-D to respondent No.4 to consider the complaint of respondent No.5 and initiate action. Pursuant to the same, respondent No.4 had issued a show-cause notice to the petitioner vide Annexure-E and the petitioner had submitted his reply to the said show-cause notice vide Annexure-F.
4. It appears that subsequently respondent No.4 has forwarded the show-cause notice as well as the reply given by the petitioner to the said show-cause notice, to respondent No.3 vide communication dated 30.12.2024 at Annexure-G for taking appropriate action against the petitioner. Pursuant to the same, respondent No.3 had -5- NC: 2026:KHC-K:2250 WP No. 200998 of 2025 HC-KAR initiated enquiry against the petitioner and has submitted an Enquiry Report to respondent No.2 on 03.02.2025 vide Annexure-L. Considering the said Enquiry Report, respondent No.2 has directed respondent No.3 to relieve the petitioner from service vide communication dated 19.02.2025 at Annexure-M and consequently respondent No.3 has directed respondent No.4 to relieve the petitioner from service vide Annexure-M1 dated 28.02.2025. Thereafter, respondent No.4 has issued communication Annexure-N dated 17.03.2025 to the petitioner informing him that based on the Enquiry Report dated 03.02.2025 and the order dated 19.02.2025 passed by respondent No.2, the petitioner was relieved from service. It is under these circumstances, the petitioner is before this Court seeking for the aforesaid reliefs.
5. Petitioner has been appointed to the post of Barefoot Technician in respondent No.4 Gram Panchayat vide Annexure-A dated 28.11.2022. Section 112 of the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 [for -6- NC: 2026:KHC-K:2250 WP No. 200998 of 2025 HC-KAR brevity, 'the Act'] provides for staffing pattern and schedule of employees of the Gram Panchayat. A reading of the said provision would go to show that Gram Panchayat can appoint its staff subject to approval of the Chief Executive Officer of Zilla Parishat, except appointment of Panchayat Development Officer, Secretary and Accounts Assistant. Section 113 of the said Act provides for appointment and control of employees. Section 113 of the Act reads as follows:
"113. Appointment and control of employees.-
(1) Subject to the provisions of Sections 111 and 112 the Grama Panchayat may, with the prior approval of the Chief Executive Officer appoint other employees of the Grama Panchayat and pay their salaries from the Grama Panchayat Fund:
Provided that in making appointments the appointing authority shall reserve posts for the Scheduled Castes, the Scheduled Tribes and other socially and educationally backward classes of citizens in the same manner and to the same extent as is applicable for the recruitment to posts in the State Civil Services.
(2) The 'Panchayat Development Officer may, by order, fine or withhold, the increment of any employee appointed by the Grama Panchayat.
(3) The Grama Panchayat may reduce in rank, remove or dismiss any employee appointed by it.-7-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2250 WP No. 200998 of 2025 HC-KAR (4) An appeal shall lie against an order passed by the Panchayat Development Officer under sub-section (2) to the Executive Officer and against an order passed by the Grama Panchayat under sub-section (3) to the Chief Executive Officer.
(5) Any appeal under sub-section (4) pending before the Mandal Panchayat or the Zilla Parishad on the date of commencement of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act, 1993, shall stand transferred respectively to the Executive Officer and the Chief Executive Officer and such appeal shall be decided by them as if it had been filed before them."
6. From a reading of the aforesaid provision of law it is apparent that the Gram Panchayat is the authority who could have taken action against the petitioner for removing him from service. As against the order of removal or dismissal of an employee passed by the Gram Panchayat, an appeal is provided under sub-section (4) of Section 113 of the Act to respondent No.3 herein. Therefore, respondent No.3 is the appellate authority as against the order of dismissal of service passed by the Gram Panchayat in exercise of its power under sub-section (3) of Section 113 of the Act.
-8-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2250 WP No. 200998 of 2025 HC-KAR
7. In the present case, respondent No.3 has held an enquiry against the petitioner and based on his Enquiry Report, respondent No.2 has passed an order at Annexure-M dated 19.02.2025, to relieve the petitioner from his service. Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion that the impugned enquiry report as well as the communications at Annexures-M, M1 and N based on the Enquiry Report relieving the petitioner from service cannot be sustained. Accordingly, the following:
ORDER
(i) The Writ Petition is allowed.
(ii) The impugned Enquiry Report at Annexure-
L dated 03.02.2025 passed by respondent No.3 and also the impugned communications based on the said Enquiry Report, at Annexures-M, M1 and N wherein direction is issued to relieve the petitioner from service are quashed.
(iii) However, this order will not come in the way of the competent authority to take -9- NC: 2026:KHC-K:2250 WP No. 200998 of 2025 HC-KAR appropriate action against the petitioner based on the complaint of respondent No.5 or any other complaint.
(iv) It is needless to state that respondents shall reinstate the petitioner for service with all consequential benefits including payment of back wages.
Sd/-
(S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE SWK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25 Ct:pk