IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON' BLE MR.JUSTICE R. DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO.436 OF 2019(S-RES) BETWEEN:
RAVISHANKAR S/O LATE LAKSHMAIAH AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS SENIOR MANAGER LEGAL (PP) OFFICE OF KARNATAKA STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION (KSFC) JAYANAGARA BRANCH, BANGALORE-560 011.
... PETITIONER (BY SRI. M. NAGAPRASANNA, SENIOR ADV. FOR SMT. M.L. SUVARANA, ADV.) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO FINANCE DEPARTMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALORE-560 001.
2. KARNATAKA STATE FINANCILAL CORPORATION (KSFC) HEAD OFFICE, KSFC BHAVAN NO.1/1, THIMMAIAH ROAD NEAR CONTONMENT RAILWAY STATION BANGALORE-560 052 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.
3. DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER OFFICE OF KARNATAKA STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION (KSFC) JAYANAGARA BRANCH BANGALORE-560 011.
4. MARKANDAIAH M FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS SENIOR MANAGER (LEGAL) KSFC, INTERNAL AUDIT DEPARTMENT MYSORE-570 009.
(BY SMT. M.S. PRATHIMA, AGA FOR R1 … RESPONDENTS SRI. BIPIN HEGDE, ADV. FOR R2 & R3 SRI. M.MOHD IBRAHIM, ADV. FOR R4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER/MEMO DATED 01.01.2019 PASSED BY R-2 AS PER ANNEXURE-C AND QUASH THE ORDER/MEMO DATED 01.01.2019 PASSED BY R-2 AS PER ANNEXURE-D.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING.
ORDER R. DEVDAS J., (ORAL):
The petitioner is working as Senior Manager (Legal) in the office of the respondent No.2 - Corporation, which is a State undertaking. It is the contention of the petitioner that he is due to retire on 30.08.2020. At this juncture, the petitioner has been transferred to Internal Audit Department, Mysore branch of KSFC, by order dated 01.01.2019.
2. Learned Senior Counsel Sri M.Nagaprasanna, appearing for the petitioner submits that the transfer policy of the respondent - Corporation clearly provides that an employee who is due to retire from service within a period of two years may be as far as possible transferred to the place of his/her choice or to a nearest place preferred by the employee. It is therefore contended that the impugned order violates the transfer policy in general and clause 3 of the policy, in particular.
3. Sri Bipin Hegde, learned counsel appearing for the respondent – Corporation, under the instructions of the Deputy General Manager of the respondent – Corporation, submits that the posting of the petitioner to Mysore was under inevitable circumstances, however the petitioner will be transferred back to Bengaluru during the general transfer that would happen between 15th May, 2019 to 30th July, 2019.
4. In the light of the above, the petition is disposed of directing the respondent - Corporation to comply with the undertaking given before this Court and transfer the petitioner from Mysore to Bengaluru during the general transfer, as state above. The respondent - Corporation shall consider and pass the order of transfer during the month of May, 2019, keeping in view the request made by the petitioner.
Writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
SD/- JUDGE KLY/