IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.N.SATYANARAYANA AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO.50057/2019 [S-KAT] BETWEEN:
SRI. APPAJI GOWDA B.A. S/O. LATE SRI. ANDANAIAH AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS WORKING AS SIRESTHEDAR [REVENUE HEAD MUNSHI] OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT BENGALURU R/AT. NO.116, 71ST CROSS, 1ST STAGE, KUMARASWAMY LAYOUT, BENGALURU – 560 078 …PETITIONER [BY SRI. R.B. SADASIVAPPA, ADVOCATE] AND:
1 THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT M.S. BUILDING, SACHIVALAYA BENGALURU – 560 001 2 THE REGIONAL COMMISSIONER BENGALURU DIVISION SHANTHINAGAR BENGALURU – 560 027 3 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT K.G. ROAD BENGALURU – 560 009 …RESPONDENTS [BY SMT. SHILPA S. GOGI, HCGP FOR R1 TO R3; SMT. MANJULA D., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. L. SRINIVAS BABU, ADVOCATE FOR C/R4] THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF TRANSFER OF THE PETITIONER VIDE OFFICIAL MEMORANDUM DTD. 10.10.2019 VIDE ANNEXURE-A7 AND QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER VIDE ANNEXURE-A DTD. 15.10.2019 PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU, IN APPLICATION NO.6038/2019.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, SATYANARAYANA J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The petitioner herein is impugning the interim order dated 15.10.2019 passed in Application No.6038/2019 on the file of the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal at Bengaluru [‘KSAT’, for short].
2. The grievance of the petitioner is that presently he is working as Shirastedar in the Office of the Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru Urban District, Bengaluru. Besides that, he is said to be the Vice President of Karnataka State Employees’ Association.
According to him, the Respondents 2 and 3 have transferred him from the post of Shirastedar in the Office of the Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru Urban District, Bengaluru, to Taluk Office at Anekal, Bengaluru Urban District, which was subject matter of challenge before the KSAT in Application No.6038/2019 wherein he had sought for stay of the order of transfer on two grounds; that as an office bearer of the State Employees’ Association, he should not be have been disturbed for a period of five years from the place where he is presently working; secondly on the ground that the said transfer is premature in nature. In the said application, he also sought for stay of the order of transfer. It is seen that the KSAT after considering his request, has passed the following order:
“Pending disposal of the aforesaid application, it is ordered by the Tribunal on 15.10.2019 by Hon’ble Dr. Justice K. Bhakthavatsala [Chairman] and Hon’ble Mr.
V.P. Baligar [Administrative Member] that, we direct the applicant to hand over the charge of the post to respondent No.4 immediately, failing which respondent No.4 is given liberty to assume the charge of the post of the applicant.”
which is sought to be challenged on the ground that the said order is not a speaking order and that it does not refer to the order of transfer which was under challenge. In any event, this Court is of the considered opinion that a reading of the said order would indicate that the KSAT was not inclined to consider the prayer of the petitioner for relief of the interim order of staying the order of his transfer as sought by him. Since, the grievance of the petitioner being that the said order is not a speaking order, the petitioner is at liberty to go back to KSAT and seek clarification of the said interim order dated 15.10.2019.
With such liberty to the petitioner, this writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE AN/-
Sd/- JUDGE