Karnataka High Court
Sri. C. Adarsha Kumar vs The State Of Karnataka on 8 August, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:31775-DB
WP No. 20111 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
WRIT PETITION NO. 20111 OF 2023 (S-KSAT)
BETWEEN:
SRI. C. ADARSHA KUMAR,
S/O CHANNAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER,
KANNAMANGALA GRAMA PANCHAYATH,
DEVANAHALLI TALUK,
BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU
R/A NO.H-34, BRIGADE ARCADE,
CIDAR, DEVANAHALLI.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SUBRAMANI M A., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed
by NANDINI D
Location: High
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
Court of REPRESENTED BY
Karnataka
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND
PANCHAYATH RAJ DEPARTMENT,
MULTI STORIED BUILDINGS,
BENGALURU-560001.
2. THE COMMISSIONER,
PANCHAYATH RAJ DEPARTMENT
KEMPEGOWDA ROAD,
GANDHINAGAR,
BENGALURU-560009.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:31775-DB
WP No. 20111 of 2023
3. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT
BEERASANDRA, CHAPPARADA KALLU,
KUNDANA HOBLI,
DEVANAHALLI TALUK.
4. SRI T. SRINIVAS
PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER,
DODDABELAVANGALA GRAMA PANCHAYATH,
DODDABALLAPURA TALUK,
BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. NAVEEN CHANDRASHEKAR, AGA FOR R1 & R2,
SRI. V.R.SARATHY, ADV. FOR C/R-4,
R-3 IS SERVED & UNREPRESENTED.)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET
ASIDE ORDER DATED 20/07/2023 IN APPLICATION
NO.2262/2023 PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA STATE
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU (ANNEXURE-A) AND
CONSEQUENTLY TO ALLOW THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
- B GROUP, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN
AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
and
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN)
1. This Writ Petition is filed challenging the order
dated 20th July, 2023 passed in Application No.2262 of
NC: 2024:KHC:31775-DB
2023 by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal,
Bengaluru (for short hereinafter referred to as the
"Tribunal").
2. Heard Sri Subramani M.A., learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner; Sri Naveen Chandrashekar,
learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the
official Respondents 1 and 2 and Sri V.R. Sarathy, learned
counsel appearing for caveator respondent No.4.
3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the
petitioner that even though the petitioner had specifically
contended that there were disciplinary proceedings
pending against private respondents also, the said fact has
not been taken note of by the Tribunal and the Tribunal
had dismissed the application filed by the writ petitioner
challenging the order of transfer on the ground that there
were complaints as against the writ petitioner. The learned
counsel further submits that the transfer guidelines would
provide that it is only on a memo of charges being issued
that an employee is liable to be transferred out even in
NC: 2024:KHC:31775-DB
case there are allegations. Learned Counsel also placed
reliance on the decision of this Court in the case of DR.
PATIL SHASHI v. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS
rendered in Writ Petition No.104846 of 2022 decided on
15th December, 2022 to contend that the fact that
complaints have been received cannot be a reason to
transfer out a government servant without taking action
against him.
4. The learned Counsel appearing for the private
respondent on the other hand, contends that it was on
account of specific complaints made by the Members of
Grama Panchayat where the writ petitioner was working
that he had been moved out. It is further submitted that
the private respondent was working in Kannamangala
Grama Panchayat earlier and it was on account of certain
allegations raised against him which gave rise to the
disciplinary proceedings against him that he was moved
out from the said place. It is submitted that he was
exonerated of the charges in the disciplinary proceedings,
NC: 2024:KHC:31775-DB
and he had been re-posted to the Kannamangala Grama
Panchayat in view of the fact that the allegations against
him stood disproved. It is further submitted that a memo
of charges has been issued as against the writ petitioner
on 04th October, 2023 and that the disciplinary enquiry
stood entrusted to the Upa Lokayukta under Rule 14-A of
the Karnataka Civil Services (Classification, Control and
Appeal) Rules, 1957. It is further submitted that the
transfer guidelines also provide for placing an employee
under deputation/transfer in lieu of placing him under
suspension and that the said power has been exercised in
the instant case.
5. Learned Government Advocate submits that there
were serious allegations against the writ petitioner and the
allegations had been raised by the elected Members of the
Panchayat which were taken note of by the competent
authority and the transfer is effected. It is contended that
later, memo of charges have also been issued and
disciplinary enquiry is continuing.
NC: 2024:KHC:31775-DB
6. Having considered the contentions advanced and
in view of the provisions of the transfer guidelines which
were in force at the relevant point of time, especially
Clause 7(1) thereof, we are of the opinion that the order
of transfer does not warrant interference. The Writ
Petition therefore fails and is accordingly dismissed.
Sd/-
(ANU SIVARAMAN)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(G BASAVARAJA)
JUDGE
lnn
