IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.N.SATYANARAYANA AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO.50124/2019 [S-KSAT] BETWEEN:
K.S. ANIL KUMAR S/O. T.S. SHANTHAKUMAR AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS WORKING AS REVENUE INSPECTOR OFFICE OF THE TAHASILDHAR MYSORE TALUK MYSORE – 570 010 …PETITIONER [BY SRI. SATISH K, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. M.S. BHAGWAT, ADVOCATE] AND:
1 THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE [SERVICES – 2] REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY M.S. BUILDING BANGALORE – 560 001 2 SRI. LAKSHMINARAYANA K., S/O. KRISHNE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS WORKING AS REVENUE INSPECTOR VARUNA HOBLI, MYSORE TALUK, MYSORE – 570 004 …RESPONDENTS [BY SMT. SHILPA S. GOGI, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. L. MAHESH, ADVOCATE FOR C/R2] THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS FROM THE RESPONDENTS, QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 21.10.2019 PASSED BY THE HON’BLE KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE, IN APPLICATION NO.6135/2019 [ANNX-A] FILED BY THE R-2 HEREIN.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, SATYANARAYANA J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The petitioner herein is impugning the order dated 21.10.2019 passed in Application No.6135/2019 on the file of the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, Bengaluru [‘KSAT’, for short].
2. Admittedly, the said application is filed by the Respondent No.2 herein, who is disturbed from the place of his posting as Revenue Inspector, Varuna Hobli, Mysuru Taluk, to which he was posted on 30.07.2019. Within three months, he is sought to be disturbed from that place by posting the petitioner herein to the said place as Revenue Inspector by order dated 15.10.2019 vide Annexure-A3 before the KSAT.
3. When the said application was taken up for consideration, the KSAT while staying the order of transfer, has directed the petitioner herein who is the Respondent No.2 in the said proceedings, to handover charge to the applicant therein, pending disposal of the application. While doing so, certain conditions were imposed with reference to taking over of charge by the Respondent No.2 herein from the petitioner who had already assumed charge, which is sought to be challenged in this writ petition by relying upon the order passed by this Court in another writ petition bearing No.46698/2019 disposed of by order dated 9.10.2019, wherein passing of the interim order in the aforesaid manner, was interfered and deprecated by this Court.
4. However, in the present set of facts, though we still maintain the same opinion, we are of the considered opinion that the order impugned does not call for interference, in as much as, there being an attempt to disturb the posting of the Respondent No.2 within three months from the date of his posting to the place where he was working as Revenue Inspector at Varuna Hobli, Mysuru Taluk, by order of transfer, staying of the same, consequently restoring the posting of the Respondent No.2 to the very same place does not call for interference by this Court.
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE AN/-