[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Sri Krishna S/O Late Eranna vs The State Of Karnataka on 2 April, 2026
Author: B.M.Shyam Prasad
Bench: B M Shyam Prasad, Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:4956-DB
WP No. 102793 of 2026
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF APRIL 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
WRIT PETITION NO.102793 OF 2026 (S-KAT)
BETWEEN:
SRI. KRISHNA S/O. LATE ERANNA
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
NOW WORKING AS FIRST DIVISION ASSISTANT,
QUALITY CONTROL SUB-DIVISION,
BALLARI-583101.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. PRITHVEESH M.K, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
Digitally PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT,
signed by VIKAS SOUDHA BENGALURU-560001.
RAKESH S
HARIHAR 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER
Location: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT,
High Court of
Karnataka, COMMUNICATION AND BUILDING (SOUTH),
Dharwad K.R.CIRCLE, BENGALURU-560001.
Bench
3. THE CHIEF ENGINEER
COMMUNICATION AND BUILDING (NORTH EAST),
KALABURAGI-585102.
4. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT,
BALLARI CIRCLE-583101, BALLARI.
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:4956-DB
WP No. 102793 of 2026
HC-KAR
5. SRI. K. NAGARAJU S/O. MALLESH
AGED 48 YEARS,
NOW WORKING AS FIRST DIVISION ASSISTANT,
OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER,
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT,
BALLARI CIRCLE, BALLARI-583101.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SHARAD V.MAGADUM, AGA FOR R1 TO R4)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS FROM THE
RESPONDENTS ISSUE A WRIT OR ORDER SETTING
ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 09/02/2026
PASSED BY THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA STATE
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BELAGAVI BENCH IN
APPLICATION NO.10206/2026 (ANNEXURE - A) AS WELL
AS IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 12/03/2026 PASSED BY
THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE
TRIBUNAL, BELAGAVI BENCH IN APPLICATION
NO.10206/2026 (ANNEXURE-B) INSOFAR AS
DIRECTION ISSUED TO THE RESPONDENTS TO
RESTORE THE APPLICANT THEREIN/5TH RESPONDENT
HEREIN IN HIS EARLIER OFFICE IS CONCERNED AND
CONSEQUENTLY DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO
CONTINUE THE PETITIONER AS FIRST DIVISION
ASSISTANT, OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDING
ENGINEER, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, BALLARI
CIRCLE OFFICE, BALLARI, TO MEET THE ENDS OF
JUSTICE; AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR
PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE
THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:4956-DB
WP No. 102793 of 2026
HC-KAR
ORAL ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD)
The writ petitioner, who was working as a First
Division Assistant [FDA], Quality Control Sub-
Division, Public Works Department, Ballari, has had
the benefit of the transfer order dated 06.02.2026.
The petitioner is posted as FDA with the Office of
Superintendent Engineer, Public Works Department,
a place held by the fifth respondent, and he is posted
to the petitioner's place. The fifth respondent has
filed application in Application No.10206/2026 with
the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal,
Belagavi [for short, 'the Tribunal'] calling in question
this order dated 06.02.2026, and the Tribunal has
stayed this Order dated 06.02.2026 insofar as the
petitioner and respondent No.5.
2. On 12.03.2026, with the learned counsel
for the fifth respondent stating that he is not
permitted to report to duty at his original place [with
NC: 2026:KHC-D:4956-DB
HC-KAR
the Office of Superintendent Engineer, Public Works
Department] despite the interim order dated
09.02.2026, the Tribunal has directed restoration of
the position for the fifth respondent. The petitioner is
aggrieved by this decision as also the Tribunal's
decision to grant interim order on 09.02.2026. Sri.
Prithveesh, the learned counsel for the petitioner,
while fairly submitting that, as of 12.03.2026, the
petitioner had not completed his pleadings and that
the application is listed with the Tribunal on
06.04.2026, submits the following canvassing that
this Court must consider intervening with the
Tribunal's orders for just orders.
[a] The Fifth respondent has suppressed
that, even on 09.02.2026, he had
handed over charge and the petitioner
had reported with the Office of
Superintendent Engineer, Public
Works Department.
NC: 2026:KHC-D:4956-DB
HC-KAR
[b] On 18.02.2026, the fifth respondent
voluntarily handed over to the
petitioner all the records of the Office
of FDA with the Office of
Superintendent Engineer, Public
PWD, Ballari Circle, and had also
written to the fourth respondent [the
Superintendent Engineer] to send his
Final Pay Certificate and original
Service Book to the Office of the
Assistant Executive Engineer, Quality
Control Sub-Division, Ballari,
[c] The Superintendent Engineer has also
acted upon such request.
[d] The fifth respondent suppressing all
these material circumstances and
even without making an application,
makes a request for he being restored
to the place that he held prior to the
impugned order dated 09.02.2006.
NC: 2026:KHC-D:4956-DB
HC-KAR
3. Sri. Prithveesh argues that the Tribunal's
order dated 12.03.2026, which is even without an
application, has blind sighted the petitioner as he did
not expect that he would be called upon to meet an
allegation of the fifth respondent being prevented
from continuing in the office. Sri Sharad V.
Magadum, a learned Additional Government
Advocate, who is called upon to accept notice for the
first to fourth respondents is heard on
Whether this Court must, at this stage,
intervene to direct the authorities to
continue either the petitioner or the fifth
respondent as FDA with the Office of
Superintendent Engineer, Public Works
Department.
4. The petitioner, after the Tribunal's order
dated 12.03.2026, has completed his pleadings
bringing forth circumstances which could justify his
case of suppression, and the Tribunal will have to
consider whether, in the circumstances, its decision
to grant stay of the order dated 09.02.2026 and for
NC: 2026:KHC-D:4956-DB
HC-KAR
restoration of the fifth respondent's position requires
to be vacated before this Court examines all aspects,
and that the Tribunal must consider this question at
the earliest as no person can have the benefit of an
equitable order if indeed such person has suppressed
material facts. Hence, the writ petition stands
disposed of requesting the Tribunal to consider any
application that the petitioner may have filed, or may
file for vacating its orders dated 09.02.2026 and
12.03.2026, either on 06.04.2026 or on any other
day that would be convenient according to its board
but by 30.04.2026.
Sd/-
(B.M.SHYAM PRASAD)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR)
JUDGE
KMS
CT:VH
List No.: 2 Sl No.: 5
