This writ petition challenged an order by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal reverting the petitioner from Assistant Sub-Inspector posting due to suppressed criminal cases. The High Court dismissed the petition, rejecting claims of ignorance or lack of notice.
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:18630-DB WP No. 8889 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF MAY, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO. 8889 OF 2024 (S-KSAT)
BETWEEN:
SRI MOHAN RAM M, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, S/O SRI HANUMANTHAPPA, ASSISTANT SUB INSPECTOR, HOME DEPARTMENT, ASHOKNAGAR POLICE STATION, BENGALURU-560050, R/AT NO.423, 1ST MAIN ROAD, NEW BINNY LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560023.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI ANISH JOSEPH, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally
signed by C HONNUR SAB Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI VIKAS ROJIPURA, AGA FOR R1 AND R2)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RELEVANT RECORDS PERTAINING TO IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 16.02.2024 PASSED IN A.No-5146/2023 VIDE ANNEXURE-A PASSED BY THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL AND TO ISSUE WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE AFORESAID IMPUGNED ORDER AS THE SAME IS UNJUST, ARBITRARY AND CONTRARY TO THE LAW OF LAND AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ANU SIVARAMAN J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
"i) To call for relevant records pertaining to impugned Order dated 16.02.2024 passed in Application No.5146/2023 vide ANNEXURE-A passed by the Hon'ble Tribunal and to issue Writ of Certiorari to quash the aforesaid impugned order as the same is unjust, arbitrary and contrary to the law of land and,
ii) To call for records pertaining to the impugned communication bearing No.COPBCP/EST/EST1(PRMS)/4/2023-EST-COP-BCP dated 30.10.2023 of the 3rd Respondent vide ANNEXURE-R6 and another impugned Communication bearing No.Sibbandi1/35/DCP(Ke)/2019 dated 01.12.2023 of the 4th Respondent vide ANNEXURE-A7 and set aside the same by issuing a Writ of Certiorari to quash the
said impugned Endorsement by considering it as arbitrary, illegal, unjustified, unsustainable and contrary to rules and to extend all consequential benefits arising thereto, and
iii) Pass such other orders or issue such other directions as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity."
16.02.2024 in his application No.5146/2023. The petitioner had submitted before the Tribunal that he was a police constable appointed in the year 2003. It is stated that when he was not considered for promotion to the post of Head Constable, he had approached the Tribunal. By Annexure-2 the order dated 17.04.2018, the Tribunal has directed the consideration of his promotion as Head Constable
and he was promoted as such. Thereafter, by Annexure-4, he was promoted to the post of Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police and was posted at the Ashok Nagar Police Station. It is contended that by Annexure-7, he was relieved from the post of Assistant Sub-Inspector on the ground that there is a criminal case pending against him and his promotion was placed in a sealed cover and he was required to assume charge as Head Constable of J.B. Nagar Traffic Police Station. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the reversion was without issuing any notice to him and that the grounds stated in the order are not tenable. It is submitted that though these grounds were urged before the Tribunal, the Tribunal refused to accept the contentions of the petitioner, dismissed the application and imposed a cost of Rs.10,000/- on him.
criminal case against him and that it is submitted that the criminal case registered against the
petitioner was a collective action and that there was no case against the petitioner alone and therefore, the order reverting him from the post of Assistant Sub-Inspector which was produced by the respondents before the Tribunal as Annexure-R6 was illegal and without proper notice to the petitioner.
NC: 2024:KHC:18630-DB WP No. 8889 of 2024
by him on 17.07.2023, at the time of counselling, preparatory to promotion was produced as Annexure-R9 before the Tribunal. It is further submitted that as a matter of fact, a criminal case had been registered against him in which, charge sheet had been filed on 18.07.2019 and the declaration furnished by the petitioner was therefore clearly erroneous and in suppression of material facts. It is submitted that the order of reversion which was not served on the petitioner only because he remained unauthorisedly absent, was not challenged before the Tribunal. The Tribunal therefore considered the relevant aspects of the matter and had taken note of the declaration given by the applicant at the time of promotion. It was after considering all the aspects of the matter and the legal contentions raised, it was found that there is no merit in the application preferred before it and had dismissed the same with costs.
of the petitioner, we are unable to accept the contention that the petitioner who was a Head Constable of Police under orders of promotion to the post of Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police was unaware of the implications or the facts stated by him in the declaration letter which was produced as Annexure-R9 before the Tribunal. A copy of the same has been made available before this Court as well. The petitioner has specifically stated in the declaration that no criminal case is registered against
him and that no case is pending against him before any Court. This cannot be construed to be an innocent mistake committed by him or oversight in any manner. The petitioner who is a member of a uniformed force cannot plead ignorance of the meaning and implications of his statement. In the facts of the case, the contention that a prior notice
was required before reversion also cannot be
accepted since the petitioner has no contrary
contentions on facts.
Sd/JUDGE
Sd/JUDGE
CHS
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Writ Petitioner is entitled to quash the order of reversion despite having declared no criminal case was pending against him at the time of promotion.
Whether a prior notice was required before reverting the Writ Petitioner from the post of Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Sri Mohan Ram M
The State of Karnataka
The Commissioner of Police, Bengaluru City
The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Administration, Bengaluru City
The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Bengaluru City
Anu Sivaraman
Anant Ramanath Hegde
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
