Sri Dinesh B M vs The State Of Karnataka
2021 Latest Caselaw 212 Kant

                           1



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

    DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2021

                       PRESENT

   THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR
                          AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR

            W.P.NO.11722/2020 (S-KSAT)

BETWEEN:

Sri Dinesh B M
S/o Mariyanna C
Aged about 37 years
Working as Panchayat Development Officer
Office of the Panchayat Development Officer
Thyamagondlu Gram Panchayat
Nelamangala Taluk
Bengaluru Rural District
Bengaluru - 562 123
                                              ...Petitioner
(By Sri Prithveesh M K, Advocate)

AND:

1. The State of Karnataka
   Represented by its
   Principal Secretary
   Department of Rural
   Development and Panchayat Raj
   M.S.Building, Dr. Ambedkar Veedhi
   Bengaluru - 560 001

2. The Chief Executive Officer
   Bengaluru Rural Zilla Panchayat
   Chapparada Kallu
                             2


  Devanahalli-Doddaballapur Road
  Bengaluru Rural District
  Bengaluru - 562 110

3. Sri Raveendra S V
   S/o P.Venkatappa
   Aged about 36 years
   Working as Panchayat Development Officer
   Office of Panchayat Development Officer
   Sompura Gram Panchayat
   Nelamangala Taluk
   Bengaluru Rural District
   Bengaluru - 562 110
                                         ...Respondents
(By Sri B.O.Anil Kumar, Advocate for C/R3;
Smt. Shilpa S Gogi, HCGP for R1 and R2)

     This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227
of Constitution of India praying to call for records
pertaining to the impugned judgment and orders dated
17.12.2019 and 10.03.2020 passed in Application
No.6003/2019 and Review Application No.2/2020
respectively, both of which are passed by the Karnataka
State Administrative Tribunal at Bengaluru vide
Annexure-A and B, set aside the impugned judgment
and orders dated 17.12.2019 and 10.03.2020 passed in
Application No.6003/2019 and Review Application
No.2/2020 respectively, by the Karnataka State
Administrative Tribunal at Bengaluru vide Annexure-A
and B and consequently allow the said Application
No.6003/2019 as prayed for by the petitioner before the
Tribunal (Annexure-C to the writ petition), etc.

      This writ petition coming on for hearing-
interlocutory application this day, Aravind Kumar, J,
made the following:
                                3


                          ORDER

Heard learned Advocates appearing for the parties.

Perused the records.

2. Petitioner being aggrieved by the order dated

17.12.2019 passed in Application No.6003/2019 is

before this Court.

3. Petitioner who was promoted to the post of

Panchayat Development Officer on 03.03.2014

(Annexure-A1) was posted to Nalluru Gram Panchayat,

Devanahalli Taluk and retained his earlier post at

Shivagange Gram Panchayat, Nelamangala Taluk. By

notification dated 04.09.2017 (Annexure-A2) petitioner

was transferred and posted to Sompura Gram

Panchayat, Nelamangala Taluk and took charge of the

said post.

4. It is an undisputed fact that said post is a

Group-C post and under the extant transfer guidelines

dated 07.06.2013 the fixed tenure is 4 years. However

by order dated 30.09.2019 (Annexure-A3), 3rd

respondent who was working at Thyamagondlu Gram

Panchayat was transferred and posted to the place of

petitioner, namely, Sompura Gram Panchayat as

Panchayat Development Officer. No posting was given to

the petitioner. Being aggrieved by the said order dated

30.09.2019, Application No.6003/2019 referred to supra

was filed. Tribunal by order dated 04.10.2019

(Annexure-A2), granted an interim order of stay. In fact

on the said date i.e., on 04.10.2019 (Annexure-A6), the

second respondent had passed an order transferring the

3rd respondent to the place of petitioner and vice-versa.

This fact was not within the knowledge of the Tribunal.

5. Be that as it may. Tribunal seems to have

gone on tangent while passing impugned order. We say

so for the reason that on appearance of 3rd respondent

before the Tribunal, applicant as well as the 3rd

respondent started making allegations against each

other and taking note of the fact that there was a

disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner

herein and he was facing charges, though held that

impugned order was premature did not interfere with the

same on the ground of the enquiry proceedings having

concluded and report was yet to be filed before the

disciplinary authority by the enquiry officer. In fact the

enquiry officer had already submitted his report on

06.09.2019 itself and had exonerated the petitioner of all

charges. This was also highlighted by the petitioner in

Review Petition filed before the Tribunal.

6. The petitioner would also not dispute the fact

that while working in Sompura Gram Panchayat, he had

worked as in-charge Panchayat Development Officer for a

period of two years i.e., from 2015 to 2017 and

subsequently from the date of order dated 04.09.2017

(Annexure-A2) till the interim order came to be passed

on 04.10.2019 i.e., for a period of two years. Thus in

effect the petitioner has worked in Sompura Gram

Panchayat for four years and even otherwise the order of

posting of 3rd respondent by O.M. dated 30.09.2019

(Annexure-A3) would clearly indicate that it has received

the approval of the Chief Minister. Thus, the order of

transferring the third respondent to the place of

petitioner, namely, as Panchayat Development Officer of

Sompura Gram Panchayat was in accordance with the

transfer guidelines dated 07.06.2013 and there was no

infraction by the competent authority of the said

guidelines.

7. Though a valiant attempt was made by Sri

Prithveesh M K, learned counsel for the petitioner to

contend that order of transfer dated 04.10.2019 posting

the petitioner to the place of third respondent has not

received the approval of the Chief Minister, we are not

inclined to accept the same in as much as in the very

same order dated 04.10.2019 (Annexure-A6) there is a

clear reference to the order dated 30.09.2019 (Annexure-

A3) wherein the Chief Minister has approved the transfer

of 3rd respondent to Sompura Gram Panchayat. As such

said contention also falls to the ground. For the reasons

afore-stated we are of the considered view that there is

no merit in the writ petition and hence we proceed to

pass the following:

ORDER

(i) Writ Petition is dismissed.

(ii) Order dated 17.12.2019 (Annexure-A) passed in Application No.6003/2019 is affirmed.

(iii) No order as to costs.

All pending applications stand consigned to

records.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

Kmv/-