A Second Division Assistant challenged his suspension order by the Mysore Urban Development Authority. After an interim stay, he resumed duty and charges were issued; the court quashed the suspension and directed completion of the departmental enquiry within six months.
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:12488 WP No. 6661 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
WRIT PETITION NO.6661 OF 2024 (S-RES)
BETWEEN:
SRI.M.S.NANDISH S/O LATE SURESH M N AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS WORKING AS SECOND DIVISION ASSISTANT MYSORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY JLB ROAD MYSURU – 570 005
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI.SATISH K, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed by ALBHAGYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
AND:
NC: 2024:KHC:12488 WP No. 6661 of 2024
JLB ROAD MYSURU – 570 005
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.T.P.VIVEKANANDA, ADVOCATE FOR R.2; SMT.B.SUKANYA BALIGA, AGA FOR R.1)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS FROM THE RESPONDENT NO.2 IN RESPECT OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 16/11/2023 (ANNEXURE-E) AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The challenge in the writ petition is the impugned
order dated 16.11.2023. This Court vide order dated 04.03.2024 was pleased to stay the suspension order.
respondent No.2, on instructions, submits that pursuant to the interim order granted by this Court, the petitioner is permitted to resume duty and articles of charges are issued to the petitioner. Therefore, he would seek leave of this Court to proceed against the petitioner.
counsel appearing for respondent No.2, this Court is of the view that the suspension order does not survive for consideration as the petitioner is permitted to resume duty.
bound to face departmental enquiry. The Enquiry Officer shall proceed with the enquiry in accordance with law.
5. Keeping the above submission, this Court
proceeds to pass the following;
ORDER
(i) The writ petition is allowed in part.
NC: 2024:KHC:12488 WP No. 6661 of 2024
(ii) The impugned suspension order bearing No.MaiNaPraa/Sibbandi(3).P.R. 195/2013-14 dated 16.11.2023 passed by respondent No.2 as per Annexure –E is hereby quashed.
(iii) It is made clear that the Enquiry Officer shall conclude enquiry in accordance with law within an outer limit of six months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
(iv) Pending applications, if any, are also disposed off.
Sd/JUDGE
NBM
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the suspension order dated 16.11.2023 survives after the petitioner was permitted to resume duty pursuant to the interim stay?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sri. M.S. NANDISH
The State of Karnataka represented by its Principal Secretary, Department of Urban Development
The Commissioner, Mysore Urban Development Authority
Sachin Shankar Magadum
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
