IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE B. V. NAGARATHNA AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD W.P. NOS.19049-53 OF 2019 (S-KSAT) BETWEEN 1. SRI DINESH M M S/O MUDDEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, VETERINARY INSPECTOR SIRE EVALUTION CELL, RAJAJINAGAR VETERINARY HOSPITAL RAJAJINAGAR BANGALORE R/O MORARJI DESAI RESIDENTIAL SCHOOL CAMPUS ADAKAMARANAHALLI BANGALORE NORTH TALUK BANGALORE-562162 2. SRI S A SAFEER S/O AMEER AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, VETERINARY INSPECTOR VETERINARY DISPENSARY GORAVALE MANDYA TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT R/O #2326 2ND CROSS, GANDHINAGAR MANDYA TALUK & DISTRICT 3. SRI S G VASANTHA KUMAR S/O S G GADDIGAPPA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, VETERINARY INSPECTOR, VETERINARY DISPENSARY ANTHARAGATTE, KADUR TALUK CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT R/O ‘MATHRU SHREE’ OPP FOREST QUARTERS K M ROAD, SUBHASH NAGAR, KADUR TALUK CHICKMAGALUR DISTRICT-577 548 4. SRI H S MADHU S/O H S SHIVAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, VETERINARY INSPECTOR VETERINARY DISPENSARY VAKKALAGERE KADUR TALUK CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT R/O HIRENALLUR KADUR TALUK CHICKMAGALURU DISTRICT 5. SRI K S ANILKUMAR S/O K G SATHYA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, VETERINARY INSPECTOR VETERINARY DISPENSARY HALEBUDANOOR, MANDYA TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT R/O KERENODU VILLAGE & POST MANDYA TALUK & DISTRICT ... PETITIONERS (By Sri.JAVID HUSSAIN – ADVOCATE ) AND 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY ANIMAL HUSBANDRY AND VETERINARY SERVICES DEPARTMENT VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560001 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY AND VETERINARY SERVICES DEPARTMENT V V TOWER, DR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU-560 001 .. RESPONDENTS (By Sri I TARANATH POOJARY – HCGP) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARITCLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS RELATING TO THE PASSING OF THE ORDER DATED 11.4.2019 PASSED IN APPLICATION NO.2513-17-2019 AS PER ANNEXURE-A ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU, PERUSE THE SAME AND QUASH THE SAME INSOFAR AS IT RELATES TO NON GRANT OF AN AD INTERIM ORDER OF STAY, OR DIRECT AS THE CASE MAYBE AND ALLOW THE INTERIM PRAYER IN APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL WITH ALL CONSEQUENTIAL BENEFITS.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, NAGARATHNA J., PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Heard.
Issue notice to the respondents.
Learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for respondents 1 and 2.
2. Though the writ petitions are listed for preliminary hearing, with the consent of learned counsel on both sides, they are heard finally.
3. Petitioners have assailed order dated 11.04.2019 passed in application Nos.2513-17 of 2019 by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal at Bengaluru (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal’ for the sake of convenience).
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the order at Annexure-A9 dated 13.03.2019 has been assailed before the Tribunal. The petitioners had sought for an interim protection pending disposal of their applications. However, the Tribunal has granted eight weeks time to file reply statement. By then, the petitioners would be reverted. As a result they would suffer prejudice and hardship. Therefore, the petitioners have filed these writ petitions assailing the order dated 11.04.2019.
5. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondents contended that the interim prayer sought for by the petitioners herein has not been rejected by the Tribunal. Only time has been granted to file statement of objections. Therefore, the petitioners could always seek an interim relief before the Tribunal once the statement of objections are filed by the respondents herein.
6. By way of reply, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the respondents would procrastinate in filing of statement of objections and until the same are filed, the Tribunal would not entertain the petitions for consideration of interim relief. Therefore, pending filing of statement of objections by the respondents, liberty may be reserved to the petitioners to move before the vacation bench as the petitioners apprehend that the impugned order dated 13.03.2019 would be given effect to and they would be reverted from their present post. That the petitioners have a good case on merits.
7. In the circumstances, we find it just and proper to reserve liberty to the petitioners to move the Vacation Bench of the Tribunal for seeking interim reliefs, if so advised.
With the aforesaid liberty, the Writ Petitions are disposed off.
Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE rs