Allowed

Sri K Srinivasa v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC19 Aug 2024WP/19641/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged a modification order withdrawing a transfer of the petitioner. The Court quashed the impugned order and granted the respondent time until November 31, 2024, to report to a new posting and voluntarily hand over the office to the petitioner by December 1, 2024.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order is quashed. Respondent No.4 permitted to continue till November 31, 2024, with direction to hand over charge to petitioner on December 1, 2024.

Sri K Srinivasa Vs the State of Karnataka — Service and Employment | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

NC: 2024:KHC:33124 WP No. 19641 of 2024

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 19641 OF 2024 (S-TR)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI. K. SRINIVASA S/O LATE SRI KRISHNA, AGED 56 YEARS, STORE KEEPER (BESCOM) OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, BESCOM CENTRAL STORE, RAJAJINAGARA BANGALORE-10 C/O NO.26/1, MOTAPPA PALYA, SHANKAR SAROWAR, BEHIND SSB SCHOOL, INDIRANAGARA, BANGALORE-38.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. C.M. NAGABUSHANA, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by MARKONAHALLI RAMU PRIYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, ENERGY DEPARTMENT, VIKASA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560001.

¶14

THE GENERAL MANAGER (ADMIN AND HRD) THE BESCOM, CAUVERY K G ROAD, BANGALORE-9.

¶15

THE SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER BESCOM, SOUTH CIRCLE, ARAVINDA BHAVANA, 3^RD FLOOR, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE-9.

¶16

SRI. CHANDRASHEKAR M.S. MAJOR,

¶17

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:33124 WP No. 19641 of 2024

¶18

PRESENTLY WORKING AS STORE KEEPER, INDIRANAGAR DIVISION STORE, INDIRANAGAR, BANGALORE-76.

¶19

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S.T.NAIK, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.1; SRI. C. CHANNEGOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.2 AND 3; SMT. SUVARNA M.L., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. K. PUTTEGOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.4)

¶20

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS AND QUASH THE IMPUGNED MODIFICATION ORDER BEARING NO.AaE(V)/BENDAVA/ULENI/LE/SALE/SA-1/2024-25, CYS-72 DATED 11.07.2024 (ANNEXURE-A) PASSED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT AND DIRECT THE OFFICIAL RESPONDENTS TO CONTINUE THE PETITIONER AS STORE KEEPER, INDIRANAGARA DIVISIONAL STORE BANGALORE.

¶21

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

The petitioner has challenged an order bearing No.AaE(V)/Bendava/ULeNi/Le/SaLe/Sa-1/2024-25 CYS-72

¶25

dated 11.07.2024 (henceforth referred to as "impugned order") passed by the respondent No.3 withdrawing the earlier order

¶26

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:33124 WP No. 19641 of 2024

¶27

transferring him as Store Assistant, Grade -II at Indiranagar, Zonal store.

¶28

The petitioner contends that he was posted as the Store Assistant - Grade -II at Indiranagar store on 06.07.2024, where the respondent No.4 was working and he was transferred as Assistant Grade-II at Rajajinagar.. However the said order was modified and recalled on 11.07.2024. The petitioner contends that this is in violation of the transfer guidelines issued by the State Government which is adopted by Bangalore Electricity Supply Company. He also contends that respondent No.4 was occupying the post of Store AssistantGrade II at Indiranagar for more than four years and therefore, the order transferring him as Store Assistant-Grade II at Rajajinagar was lawful. He also claimed that the order dated 11.07.2024 was at the behest of a Minister and therefore, prays that the same be set at naught.

¶29

When this petition was listed for orders on 13.08.2024, the learned counsel for the respondent No.4 submitted that the marriage of the daughter of respondent No.4 is scheduled in November, 2024 and therefore, the

¶30

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:33124 WP No. 19641 of 2024

¶31

respondent No.4 may be permitted to continue in the same place till the date of marriage. This offer was accepted by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Consequent thereto, the learned counsel for the respondent No.4 was directed to file an affidavit undertaking unconditionally to move to the place of his posting as per Annexure- C and make way for the petitioner.

¶32

The learned counsel for respondent No.4 today filed

¶33

an affidavit of the respondent No.4 wherein he has stated that the marriage of his daughter is scheduled on either on 23^rd or 24^th of November, 2024 or on 1^st or 2^nd December, 2024 and that he would hand over charge to the petitioner.

¶34

Having regard to the statement made above, the respondent No.4 shall be permitted to continue as Store Assistant-Grade II at Indiranagar store till 31^st November, 2024. He shall handover charge of the said office to the petitioner on 01.12.2024.

¶35

In view of the above, this writ petition is disposed off by quashing the impugned order at Annexure-A. However, the respondent No.4 is granted time till 31.11.2024 to report as Store Assistant-Grade II, Rajajinagar, Bengaluru, until then he

¶36

NC: 2024:KHC:33124 WP No. 19641 of 2024

¶37

¶38

shall be permitted to continue as Store Assistant-Grade II at Indiranagar store. The respondent No.4 shall voluntarily hand over charge of the office of Store Assistant-Grade II, Indiranagar store, Bengaluru to the petitioner on 01.12.2024. If he fails to do so, the petitioner is at liberty to take over charge. It is needless to mention that respondent Nos.1 to 3 shall not entertain any request of respondent No.4 to be continued as Store Assistant-Grade II at Indiranagar store, Bengaluru beyond 31.11.2024.

¶39

Sd/(R. NATARAJ) JUDGE

¶40

¶41

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12

Sri K Srinivasa v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri K Srinivasa v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri.M. Rajendra Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Basavaraj P Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt D P Lalithamma Vs the Member Secretary

Sri Vikram Y Yadahalli Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Ramegowda S K Vs Additional Chief Secretary

Sri.H.C. Manjunath Vs the Managing Director