Karnataka High Court
Sri. Anuwanth Singh vs The State Of Karnataka on 4 June, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 4th DAY OF JUNE, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
WRIT PETITION NO. 13448 OF 2024 (S-KSAT)
BETWEEN:
SRI. ANUWANTH SINGH
S/O SRI. MALLAPPA SINGH
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
WORKING AS INSPECTOR OF EXCISE
K.S.B.C. L. WHITEFIELD-BUD-5
BENGALURU-560 091
(AS SHOWN IN THE CAUSE TITLE
OF THE KAT APPLICATION)
WORKING AS INSPECTOR OF EXCISE
RANGE NO.24, ASHOKNAGARA-BUD-4
BENGALURU-560 043
... PETITIONER
(BY SHRI. D.R. RAVISHANKAR, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
SHRI. PRASHANTH H.S., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE (EXCISE)
REP. BY ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY
VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001
2. THE COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE
2ND FLOOR, TTMC, 'A' BLOCK
BMTC BUILDING, SHANTINAGARA
BENGALURU-560 027
-
2
3. SRI. ARUN PRASAD
S/O SRI. MUNIYAPPA
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
WORKING AS INSPECTOR OF EXCISE
RANGE NO.24, ASHOKNAGARA-BUD-4
BENGALURU-560 043
(AS SHOWN IN THE CAUSE TITLE OF THE KAT
APPLICATION)
R/AT. NO.164, 4TH MAIN ROAD
HEALTH LAYOUT, ANNAPOORNESHWARI NAGAR
BENGALURU-560 091
....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI. VIKAS ROJIPURA, AGA FOR R1 & R2;
SHRI. K.N. PHANINDRA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
SHRI. BASAVARAJA PATEL G.K., ADVOCATE FOR C/R3)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF
CERTIORARI TO SET ASIDE / QUASH THE ORDER DATED
24.04.2024 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL IN APPLICATION NO.666/2024,
VIDE ANNEXURE - A AND CONSEQUENTLY DISMISS THE
APPLICATIONS BEARING NO.666/2024, ON THE FILE OF HON'BLE
KARNATAKA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL VIDE ANNEXURE - B.
THIS WRIT PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND
RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 03.06.2024 AND COMING ON FOR
PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDERS THIS DAY, ANU SIVARAMAN J.,
PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This writ petition is filed challenging Annexure-A, order
dated 24.04.2024 of the Karnataka State Administrative
Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal' for short),
-
Bengaluru, allowing the Application No.666/2024 filed by
respondent No.3 herein against his transfer order dated
31.01.2024. The applicant before the Tribunal, who is
respondent No.3 herein was working as Inspector of Excise.
He was transferred to Range No.24, Ashoknagara-BUD-4, on
29.05.2020. He contended that he was prematurely
transferred out from Ashoknagara and the petitioner herein
was posted in his place by order dated 31.01.2024. It was
contended that the order of transfer was one of premature
transfer and was to be set aside.
2. The Tribunal issued notice to the respondents and
the writ petitioner, who was respondent No.3 had entered
appearance and filed objections. The first and second
respondents also filed objections contending that the
transfer of respondent No.3, who was the applicant, was on
public exigencies and administrative convenience and that it
was approved by the Hon'ble Chief Minister. It was further
contended that Annexure-A3 order had been passed
pursuant to directions issued by the Election Commission of
India transferring the applicant/respondent No.3 herein to
-
Ashoknagara as part of the election proceedings. It was
stated that it was to fill up the vacancy which arose on
account of the election transfer of respondent No.3 that the
writ petitioner was transferred.
3. The submissions that both the orders of transfer
i.e., Annexures-A2 and A3 were election transfers were
accepted by the Tribunal and it was held that the officers
were liable to be posted back to the post earlier held by
them. This finding is under challenge in this writ petition.
4. It is submitted by the learned Senior counsel
appearing for the petitioner that the transfer of respondent
No.3 was a politically motivated transfer and that the
petitioner's transfer was not an election transfer but was a
general transfer with the prior approval of the Chief Minister.
It is stated that the petitioner had taken charge in his
transferred place i.e., Ashoknagara and that he is to be
permitted to continue there. It is submitted that the Tribunal
granted interim order in favour of respondent No.3.
Thereafter, the matter was heard and the application was
disposed of holding that the transfer of the petitioner to the
-
place of respondent No.3 is also an election transfer and
directed respondent No.2 to transfer respondent No.3 and
the petitioner to their earlier places once the Election Code
of Conduct comes to an end. It is submitted by the learned
senior counsel that the specific pleadings of the Government
were ignored by the Tribunal to hold that the petitioner's
transfer was also an election transfer. It is contended that
since the petitioner had completed his normal tenure at
K.S.B.C.L, Whitefield he was entitled to continue in his
present place of posting i.e., Ashoknagara. The writ petition
is therefore filed challenging the order of the Tribunal and
seeking retention of the writ petitioner treating his transfer
to Ashoknagara as a general transfer.
5. The learned Additional Government Advocate
appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 submits that it is clear
from the reading of Annexures A-2 and A-3 orders that the
transfer of respondent No.3 to Chikkaballapura was
admittedly an election transfer. It is revealed from the order
impugned before the Tribunal that it was only to fill up the
vacancy which arose consequent on Annexure - A3 that
-
Annexure - A2 order dated 31.01.2024 was issued. It is
stated that, it is therefore clear that the same is also an
election transfer which was necessitated due to the earlier
round of election transfers, which were issued on the same
day. Further, it is contended that the State had a specific
case before the Tribunal that the order transferring the
petitioner to Ashoknagara was only to accommodate
respondent No.3, who was transferred due to general
elections and that the said transfer is liable to operate only
as long as the Election Code of Conduct is in force. It is
submitted that general transfer orders are imminent and
that the claim, if any, of the writ petitioner for a posting will
be considered in accordance with law and in accordance with
the transfer guidelines at the time of general transfer.
6. The learned senior counsel appearing for
respondent No.3 would also contend that it is clear from the
impugned order as well as the pleadings placed on record
that the transfer of respondent No.3 as well as of the writ
petitioner herein were only election transfers and the order
specifically mentioned that the incumbents would be liable to
-
be transferred back to their earlier posts as and when the
Election Code of Conduct is withdrawn.
7. Learned senior counsel appearing for the
petitioner places reliance on the statements made in the
objections preferred by the State before the Tribunal. They
read as follows:-
"3. It is submitted that the impugned
Official Memorandum dated 31.01.2024 bearing
No.ECE/AaUa/01/TRF/2024 Adalita, the 3rd
Respondent came to be posted at Range-24,
Ashoknagara, Bengaluru Urban District, (BUD-4) as
Inspector of Excise. The said impugned Official
Memorandum came to be passed as per the
correspondence of the first Respondent vide letter
No. AaE 20 EPS 2024 dated 31.01.2024.
4. It is submitted that, it is pertinent to
state here that admittedly the Applicant came to be
transferred from Range-24, Ashoknagara, Bengaluru
Urban District, (BUD-4), as Inspector of Excise. The
applicant was working in Bangalore Urban District
since 29.05.2020 for the last 4 years. As per the
Election Guidelines, he has been transferred from
the said place to Chikkaballapura Range,
Chikkaballapura District as Inspector of Excise by
the first Respondent by order No. AE 23 EPS 2024
-
(ii), dated:31.01.2024. The copy of the same is
produced herewith and marked as ANNEXURE-R1.
6. It is submitted that, the transfer of the
Respondent No. 3 was initiated and the said transfer
came to be approved by the Hon'ble Chief Minister.
Accordingly, the first Respondent by an vide order
No. AaE20 EPS 2024 dated 31.01.2024 transferred
the 3rd Respondent to Range-24, Ashoknagara,
Bengaluru Urban District, (BUD-4), the place at
which the Applicant was working. A Copy of the
order dated at 31.01.2024 passed by 1st respondent
is produced herewith and marked as ANNEXURE-
R2."
8. The learned Additional Government Advocate
appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 would place reliance
on the judgments of a co-equal Bench of this Court in
Election Commission of India, New Delhi and another
v. State of Karnataka and others1 as well as in
R.O.Suresh s/o Onkarnaik R. v. State of Karnataka and
others2. It is contended that transfers effected on the
strength of directions issued by the Election Commission
cannot be equated to transfers governed by the guidelines
and would have to be reversed as soon as the Election Code
2013(6) Kar.L.J.363 (DB)
2019 (3) AKR 178
-
of Conduct came into effect. Learned AGA would therefore
contend that the prayers made in the writ petition as well as
the attempt made by the writ petitioner to continue at
Ashoknagara where he get be posted only as a part of the
election procedure is completely unfounded.
9. We have considered the contentions advanced.
The specific case of the petitioner before this Court is to the
effect that his transfer to Ashoknagara by order dated
31.01.2024 is a general transfer on his completing his
tenure at Chikkaballapura and that therefore he is entitled to
continue at the present place of posting for his term.
10. Having considered the orders of transfer which
are at Annexures - A2 and A3, respectively, we notice that
the writ petitioner was transferred from the KSBCL,
Whitefield to Range No.24, Ashoknagara, Bengaluru by
order dated 31.01.2024. The order does not specifically
state that it is an election transfer. It also refers to the
approval of the Chief Minister. However, it is pertinent to
notice that there was an earlier order issued on the same
date i.e., Annexure - A3 which is specifically refers to the
-
letter of the Election Commission of India and transfers
Excise Inspectors specifically as per the guidelines of the
Election Commission due to general elections of 2024. The
respondent No.3 herein has been transferred from
Ashoknagara to Chikkaballapura while the officer, who was
working at Chikkaballapura has been posted in the Office of
the Deputy Excise Commissioner, BUD-3. The said order i.e.,
Annexure A-3 specifically states as follows:-
"After the Model Election Code is completed,
the said officers shall report to the place where they
were serving before the elections."
11. The respondents had taken a specific stand in
their reply that the order of transfer of the petitioner was
necessitated due to the election transfers issued on the
basis of the directions of the Election Commission.
Construing the same, the Tribunal came to the conclusion
that since Annexure - A3 order was admittedly an order of
election transfer and since the persons transferred by
Annexure - A3 would have to be transferred back to their
original places once the Election Code of Conduct is
-
complete, the resultant and consequential orders of transfer
issued to the writ petitioner and other officers could also
only be election transfers.
12. Having considered the contentions advanced on
all sides and having taken note of the judgments which are
referred before us, we are of the opinion that to take a
different view of the matter would result in a situation where
the officers transferred as per Annexure - A3 including
respondent No.3 would be placed in a situation where there
would be no vacancy to accommodate them in the places
from where they were transferred as specifically required in
their orders of transfer.
13. The learned Additional Government Advocate
would further contend that if the contentions of the
petitioner are accepted, it would lead to a situation where
the transfers ordered on the basis of the Election Code of
Conduct which are intended to be recalled as soon as the
Code of Conduct is completed, would be rendered impossible
of performance. It is conducted that since the retention of
the officers, who are transferred due to the general
-
elections, is not intended either by the orders themselves or
by the directions issued by the Election Commission, such an
interpretation cannot be accepted under any circumstances.
14. Having considered the contentions advanced, we
are inclined to agree with the findings of the Tribunal on the
nature of the transfer of the petitioner. Since the petitioner
was transferred specifically to accommodate the persons
who had been transferred on account of the directions
issued by the Election Commission, the said order by which
the petitioner and others were transferred also can only be
construed as an election transfer. Moreover, the petitioner
had not completed his normal tenure at the earlier date of
posting on 31.01.2024 when the order of transfer was
issued. It is contended that he has done so now. If that be
so, it is for the petitioner to make appropriate requests or
options, as the case may be, when the exercise of general
transfer, which is imminent, is taken up by the competent
among the respondents.
-
15. The writ petition therefore fails and the same is
accordingly dismissed. The normal consequences of
election transfers shall follow.
16. In view of dismissal of the main petition, pending
I.A.No.1/2024 for dispensation and I.A.No.2/2024 for
vacating stay, do not survive for consideration and the same
are hereby dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
cp*
