Disposed

Venkateshappa v. H Alias Venkatesh v H v the Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited

Karnataka HC1 Oct 2024WP/20815/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner challenged a premature transfer order. The High Court disposed of the case, upholding the transfer but directing it to take effect only after the petitioner completes two years of service at the current post.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed upholding transfer order; transfer given effect from 20.12.2024 after two years tenure.

Venkateshappa v H Alias Venkatesh v H Vs… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:41028 WP No. 20815 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 1^ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024 BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 20815 OF 2024 (S-TR)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

VENKATESHAPPA V.H. ALIAS VENKATESH V.H. S/O. LATE V.A. HALAPPA, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, WORKING AS ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELEC), OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE SUB-DIVISION, BESCOM, VIDHYANAGAR, BANGALORE.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SMT. SUVARNA LAKSHMI M.L., ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

THE KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LIMITED, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, CORPORATE OFFICE, CAUVERY BHAVAN, BANGALORE-560009.

¶12

Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

THE DIRECTOR (ADMIN AND HR) THE KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LIMITED,

¶14

CORPORATE OFFICE, CAUVERY BHAVAN, BANGALORE-560009.

¶15

BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LTD., REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, CORPORATE OFFICE, K.R. CIRCLE, BANGALORE-560001.

¶16

Y.V. ADIREDDY MAJOR BY AGE, WORKING AS ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELEC) M.R. DIVISION, BESCOM (NORTH) BANGALORE-560046.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI. CHANDRACHUD A., ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.1 TO 3;

¶19

¶20

NC: 2024:KHC:41028 WP No. 20815 of 2024

¶21

SRI. Y.R.SADASIVA REDDY, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI. RAHUL S. REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.4)

¶22

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS LEADING TO THE OFFICE ORDER DATED 30.07.2024 ISSUED BY THE 2^ND RESPONDENT AND QUASH THE IMPUGNED OFFICIAL MEMORANDUM DATED 30.07.2024 BEARING NO. KPTCL/DGMP/MES1/B58/50/2024 (ANNEXURE-F TO THE WRIT PETITION) ISSUED BY THE 2^ND RESPONDENT INSOFAR AS IT CONCERNS THE PETITIONER AT SL.NO.5 AND THE 4^TH RESPONDENT AT SL.NO.4 BY ISSUING A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI AND ETC.

¶23

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

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ

¶25

ORAL ORDER

¶26

The petitioner has challenged an order bearing No.KPTCL/DGMP/MES1/B58/50/2024 dated 30.07.2024 issued by the respondent No.2 by which, he was transferred prematurely.

¶27

The petitioner contends that when he was officiating in the cadre of Assistant Executive Engineer (Electrical) HRD Centre, BESCOM, the respondent No.2 issued an official memorandum and transferred him and posted as Assistant

¶28

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:41028 WP No. 20815 of 2024

¶29

Executive Engineer (Electrical), O & M, Sub-Division Vidyanagar. As per the orders of the respondent No.2, the respondent No.3 issued a reposting order to the petitioner by an official memorandum dated 19.12.2022 to enable him to take charge of the said post. Thereafter the petitioner took charge on 20.12.2022.

¶30

The petitioner contends that as per the transfer guidelines framed by the State Government and adopted by the respondents, he was entitled to a minimum tenure of 02 years at the transferred place. However, the petitioner was prematurely transferred in terms of the impugned order dated 30.07.2024. The petitioner contends that the exceptions for effecting transfers before completion of minimum tenure which is provided in Clause 7(1)(a) to (f) of transfer guidelines dated 25.06.2024 is not complied and therefore, the impugned order of transfer falls foul of the guidelines dated 25.06.2024.

¶31

Learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the above contentions and contended that the impugned order transferring the petitioner prematurely warrants interference.

¶32

¶33

NC: 2024:KHC:41028 WP No. 20815 of 2024

¶34

Learned Senior counsel representing the respondents submitted that though the petitioner was guaranteed a minimum tenure of 02 years at the transferred post, the transfer guidelines did contemplate situations where an employee could be transferred due to exigencies. He submits that a Coordinate bench of this Court in W.P.No.8361/2024 had recognized the right of the respondents to transfer an employee before completion of the minimum tenure of two years. The learned senior counsel therefore, prayed that this writ petition could be disposed off, directing that the order of transfer of the petitioner could be given effect to after the petitioner completes two years of service at the post.

¶35

In view of the fact that the petitioner is entitled for a minimum tenure of two years, and in view of the submission of learned senior counsel for the respondents that the order of transfer of petitioner which is challenged in this writ petition could be given effect to after the petitioner completes two years tenure as the Assistant Executive Engineer (Electrical) O and M, Sub-Division, Vidyanagar, this writ petition deserves to be disposed off on the following terms:

¶36

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:41028 WP No. 20815 of 2024

¶37

(i) Writ petition is disposed off upholding the impugned order of transfer of the petitioner dated 30.07.2024.

¶38

(ii) The order of transfer dated 30.07.2024 shall be given effect to from 20.12.2024. The respondent No.4 shall take charge of the post of Assistant Executive Engineer (Electrical), O & M Sub-Division, Vidyanagar on 20.12.2024.

¶39

(iii) The respondents shall issue appropriate orders of transfer and posting of the petitioner by 20.12.2024.

¶40

(iv) The respondent No.3 may issue appropriate movement orders to the petitioner and respondent No.4 to report at the transferred post.

¶41

Sd/(R. NATARAJ) JUDGE

¶42

¶43

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11

Venkateshappa v. H Alias Venkatesh v H v the Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Venkateshappa v. H Alias Venkatesh v H v the Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Basavaraj I Vs the State of Karnataka

Shri H. Shyama Shetty Vs Vijaya Bank

Shri H. Shyama Shetty Vs Vijaya Bank

Shri M D Chandrashekar Vs Indian Bank

T. Srinivasa Murthy S/O T Thimmaiah Vs Janatha Seva Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

Sijo Varghese Vs Union of India