Petitioner challenging suspension as Assistant Revenue Officer. Court found suspension revoked and posting granted. Petition dismissed as infructuous.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
NC: 2024:KHC:24308 WP No. 10995 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF JULY, 2024 BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 10995 OF 2024 (S-RES)
BETWEEN:
SMT LALITHA T W/O N. MURALIDHAR AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS ARO,BBMP, R/O NO. 39, 1ST CROSS, 4TH MAIN RAMMOHANPURAM BENGALURU 560 021.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. P MAHESHA.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by ANAND N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SANJEEV B L.,ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3)
NC: 2024:KHC:24308 WP No. 10995 of 2024
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-DIRECT THE RESPONDENT AUTHORITY TO REVOKE THE SUSPENSION ORDER AND REINSTATE THE PETITIONER TO HER SERVICE BY CONSIDERING THE REPRESENTATION DATED 06.12.2023 VIDE ANNEXURE-D.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioner, who was working as 'Assistant Revenue Officer' , has filed this petition for orders directing the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike [BBMP] to revoke suspension. Sri P Mahesha, the learned counsel for the petitioner, essentially contends that the petitioner could not be kept under suspension beyond six months unless there are specific orders.
This Court, in the light of this grievance, has called upon Sri B L Sanjeev, a learned standing counsel for the BBMP, to respond on this grievance
NC: 2024:KHC:24308 WP No. 10995 of 2024
as also the petitioner’s claim for subsistence allowance for the period she is kept under suspension. In response, Sri B L Sanjeev files a copy of the Office Order dated 29.06.2024, and he submits
that the order keeping the petitioner under suspension is revoked and she is given a posting. Sri B L Sanjeev also submits that the petitioner has been paid subsistence allowance, and as regards the consequence of the petitioner being under suspension, he submits that the same would be considered subject to the outcome of the contemplated enquiry.
In the light of the afore, the petition stands
dismissed as having become infructuous.
Sd/JUDGE
AN/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the suspension of the petitioner as Assistant Revenue Officer beyond six months was sustainable without specific orders.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
SMT LALITHA T W/O N. MURALIDHAR
THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER BBMP
B M SHYAM PRASAD
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
