Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Sri K S Murali vs The State Of Karnataka Department Of Finance And Others

High Court Of Karnataka|24 July, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 :PRESENT:
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE L.NARAYANA SWAMY AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE R.DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO.30722 OF 2019(S-KSAT) BETWEEN SRI K S MURALI S/O SHIVASHANKARAIAH AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, WORKING AS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, MYSORE DISTRICT MYSORE-570023 AND (BY SRI M S BHAGWAT, ADVOCATE) ... PETITIONER 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE, REPRESENTED BY ITS ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560001 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE 2ND FLOOR, TTMC A BLOCK BMTC BUILDING, SHANTI NAGAR, BANGALORE-560027 3. SMT M ROOPA W/O UMESH B J AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS UNDER AN ORDER OF POSTING AS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE HAVERI DISTRICT, HAVERI-581 110 4. SMT.ROOPASHREE.K. MAJOR WORKING AS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE (LEGAL) OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE BANGALORE-560027 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI I THARANATH POOJARY, AGA FOR R1 & R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD:12.7.2019 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE IN APPLICATION NO.125/2019 FILED BY THE R-3[ANNEXURE-A] AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, NARAYANA SWAMY J, MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER I.A.No.4/2019 is filed by the petitioner seeking leave of this Court to file the instant writ petition. The reason for filing the said application is that the petitioner was not made a party in the proceedings before the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal (KSAT) in Application No.125/2019 disposed of on 12.07.2019. It is submitted that he was not made a party in the proceedings, but the respondent No.3 was posted to his place..
2. On questioning the same, the petitioner has already filed an independent application, which was posted yesterday (23.07.2019) and was adjourned for a longer date. It was submitted that as per the order dated 12.07.2019, petitioner went and reported for duty and CTC marked at Annexure-J herein. When such being the case, question of transferring the respondent No.3 is unwarranted without hearing the other side.
3. Learned Additional Government Advocate submits that since the petitioner has filed an independent application and which is pending before the Tribunal, it is appropriate for the petitioner to approach the KSAT and pursue the application.
4. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.
5. The petitioner was reported for duty on 12.07.2019 on regular basis and since then he has been working. As the things stood, the respondent No.3, who was the applicant before the Tribunal was got posted to the same place in which the petitioner was working in less than one month. Any order which is passed contrary to the interest and adversary in nature, necessarily the affected person should made party, but the petitioner has not been made a party. Be that as it may, the petitioner has filed an independent application before the KSAT challenging the order of transfer, wherein he made a prayer to set aside the transfer order dated 12.07.2019, it is for the Tribunal to pass appropriate orders in the said matter.
6. In view of the same, we hold that it is not appropriate to interfere with the matter. Since the petitioner was not made a party before the Tribunal and also for the reason the petitioner has filed an independent application, in the ends of justice, we deem it proper to permit the petitioner to make necessary memo before the KSAT for posting. Till the matter is posted, the impugned order at Annexure-A dated 12.07.2019 shall not operate against the petitioner. This interim order shall continue till disposal of the application filed by the petitioner.
With these observations, the petition is disposed of.
7. Since we permitted the petitioner to make necessary memo to post the matter before the KSAT, notice to private respondents is dispensed with.
8. Learned Government Advocate is permitted to file memo of appearance within a period of six weeks.
Sd/- JUDGE KLY/ Sd/- JUDGE
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Sri K S Murali vs The State Of Karnataka Department Of Finance And Others

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
24 July, 2019
Judges
  • L Narayana Swamy
  • R Devdas