IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 :PRESENT:
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE L.NARAYANA SWAMY AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE R.DEVDAS BETWEEN REVIEW PETITION NO.274/2019 IN (WRIT PETITION NO.30722 OF 2019) SMT. M ROOPA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS W/O UMESH B J CONTINUED IN THE POST OF DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE AS PER ORDER DATED 12.07.2019 PASSED IN APPLICATION NO.30722/2019 R/AT BRIGADE RESIDENCY FLAT NO.105 GOKULAM ROAD MYSORE-570 001.
(BY SRI SHIVARAMU H C, ADVOCATE) AND 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE REPRESENTED BY ITS ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY VIDHANA SOUDHA BANGALORE-560 001.
2. THE COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE 2ND FLOOR TTMC A BLOCK, BMTC BUILDING SHANTHINAGAR BANGALORE-560 027.
... PETITIONER 3. K. S. MURALI AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, S/O SHIVASHANKARAIAH CLAIMING TO BE WORKING AS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, MYSORE DISTRICT ON DEPUTATION MYSORE-570 023.
NOTE: SMT. K.ROOPASHREE NOT A NECESSARY PARY.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI PRASHANTH S H, AGA FOR R1 & R2;
SRI M S BHAGWAT, ADVOCATE FOR R3) THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 114 R/W ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF CPC, PRAYING TO REVIEW THE ORDER DATED 24/07/2019 PASSED IN WP NO. 30722/2019 AT ANNEXURE-A AND DISMISS THE WRIT PETITION AND GRANT SUCH OTHER AND FURTHER RELIEF AS THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT AND PROPER UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC.
THIS REVIEW PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, NARAYANA SWAMY J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The review petitioner/respondent No.3 in W.P.No.30722/2019, has filed the present review petition seeking review of the order dated 24.07.2019, passed by this Court in W.P.No.30722/2019.
2. The grounds taken for reviewing the order is that while disposing of the writ petition, notice to the review petitioner has been dispensed with and the writ petitioner/respondent No.3 herein has suppressed the fact that as per the transfer order, the writ petitioner has reported to the duty on 01.07.2019.
3. On the other hand, the writ petitioner/ respondent No.3 herein would submit that he has not suppressed any facts and as per the directions issued by this Court he moved an application before the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the ‘KSAT’ for short), seeking leave of the Tribunal to post the matter for preliminary hearing. However, pursuant to the transfer order, the review petitioner has reported for duty and CTC has been produced and since then she has been working.
4. We have heard the learned counsels for both the parties and perused the materials on record.
5. If there is an error apparent on the face of the record, then only there could be interference in a Review petition. In the instant case, we have not found any error as pleaded in this petition. It could be seen that notice to the review petitioner has been dispensed with and the writ petition itself is disposed of; and by virtue of the same, the writ petitioner had reported for duty and if notice has been issued to the review petitioner, she could have contested the matter. Both the submissions have been examined and we have consciously dispensed notice to the review petitioner, by remanding the matter back to the KSAT, to dispose of the matter on merits and also permitted the writ petitioner make necessary memo/application before the KSAT for posting. The dispute between the parties is whether the transfer order passed by the government is valid or not, since the transfer order is premature. Whether the transfer order is premature or the legality and validity of the order is in dispute, since the KSAT has already passed an order in this regard, hence we have not expressed any opinion on merits except remanding the matter back to the KSAT. We have not found any discrepancy in the order. Therefore, the review petition deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly, the review petition is dismissed, reserving liberty to both the parties to raise all the contentions before the KSAT by making necessary applications.
It is directed the writ petitioner to make all the efforts including filing appropriate memo/application before the KSAT to get the matter listed.
In view of disposal of the review petition, I.A.No.2/2019, does not survive for consideration.
SD/- JUDGE SD/- JUDGE DL