Dismissed¶40

Sri Gorakanth Chanshetty v. the Principal Secretary

Karnataka HC7 Nov 2025WP/12387/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Seniority counted from date of appointment; sealed-cover-deferred promotion (w.e.f. 03.07.2020) does not entitle promotee to earlier seniority date; date of promotion cannot be attacked indirectly through a seniority challenge; junior promoted 08.07.2019 rightly ranked above; Rule 2, Karnataka Government Servants' (Seniority) Rules, 1957 invoked by State; KSAT Application No.1720/2024 order dated 19.03.2025 upheld; WP 12387/2025 (S-KSAT) dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The date of appointment to the concerned post must be counted for seniority; by accepting his promotion as Assistant Executive Engineer with effect from 03.07.2020, the petitioner has allowed that to be the determinative date for seniority. ¶40

Sri Gorakanth Chanshetty Vs the Principal Secretary — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶40

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner can successfully challenge the seniority list in which his junior (the second respondent, promoted on 08.07.2019) is placed above him, the petitioner himself having been promoted as Assistant Executive Engineer with effect from 03.07.2020 after disciplinary proceedings. +1 more

¶31

Court's answer

The petitioner cannot be permitted, in the guise of challenging the seniority, to challenge the date of promotion.

¶40

Ratio / Principle

¶40

Key takeaways

There is no reason for interference with the Tribunal's order dated 19.03.2025 in Application No.1720/2024, and the petition stands rejected.ratio¶40

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Karnataka (oral order per B M Shyam Prasad J., bench of B M Shyam Prasad and T.M. Nadaf JJ., 07.11.2025) rejects a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the seniority list of Assistant Executive Engineers dated 27/06/2022 (published in the Official Gazette on 30/06/2022, No.LOE 44 SESAA 2022) and the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal's order dated 19.03.2025 in Application No.1720/2024 dismissing the challenge. Held: seniority is to be counted from the date of appointment to the post, as the Tribunal rightly observed in Paragraph No.10 of its order; the petitioner, whose promotion was deferred subject to a sealed cover procedure during disciplinary proceedings and who accepted promotion as Assistant Executive Engineer with effect from 03.07.2020, cannot, in the guise of challenging the seniority, challenge the date of promotion. His junior, the second respondent, admittedly promoted on 08.07.2019, was therefore rightly placed above him in the seniority list. The State relied on Rule 2 of the Karnataka Government Servants' (Seniority) Rules, 1957; the Tribunal had also noted that the provisional seniority list was published and available to all, including the petitioner, who filed no objection. Petition rejected; no interference with the Tribunal's order.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:45099-DB WP No. 12387 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 7^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD

¶8

AND

¶9

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF WRIT PETITION NO. 12387 OF 2025 (S-KSAT)

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

SRI GORAKANTH CHANSHETTY S/O.LATE CHANNABASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, R/AT HOUSE NO.8-9-218/A15 OPP.DR.KRISHNARAO HOSPITAL GURUNANAK COLONY, BIDAR- 585401

¶12

Digitally Signed by REKHA R Location : High Court of Karnataka

¶13

…PETITIONER

¶14

(BY SRI. VEDA MURTHY M V, ADVOCATE)

¶15

AND:

¶16

THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, 3RD FLOOR, VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001.

¶17

SRI.GIRISH METI S/O CHANDAPPA

¶18

¶19

NC: 2025:KHC:45099-DB WP No. 12387 of 2025

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, 0/0 RDPRE, PROJECT SUB-DIVISION DAVANGERE- 577 201

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SRI. VIKAR ROJIPURA, AGA FOR R1)

¶24

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OR ORDER IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED SENIORITY LIST DATED 27/06/2022 PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL GAZETTE ON 30/06/2022 ISSUED IN NO.LOE 44 SESAA 2022 BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 WHICH IS AT ANNEXURE-B AND THE ORDER DATED 19/03/2025 PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL IN APPLICATION 1720/2024 DISMISSING THE APPLICATION WHICH IS AT ANNEXURE-A BY ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION; ISSUE A WRIT OR ORDER IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.1 TO RESTORE THE SENIORITY RANKING OF THE PETITIONER AT SL.NO.6251 INSTEAD OF 6655 JUST BELOW THE NAME OF RAJESH.A.VASTRAD PERTAINING TO ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEERS.

¶25

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:45099-DB WP No. 12387 of 2025

¶26

HC-KAR

¶27

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

¶28

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF

¶29

ORAL ORDER

¶30

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD)

¶31

The petitioner, who is promoted with effect from 03.07.2020 as an Assistant Executive Engineer after the disciplinary proceedings, is aggrieved with the seniority list allegedly because his junior is placed above him. The junior [the second respondent] is admittedly promoted on 08.07.2019. The Tribunal, in examining the petitioner's grievance, has concluded thus observing that though there is no material on record to show that the seniority list is served on the applicant, admittedly the provisional seniority list was published and it was available to all, including the petitioner but he has filed no objection.

¶32

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:45099-DB WP No. 12387 of 2025

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

" 10. It is settled law when a person is appointed to a post according to Rules the seniority is to be counted from the date of appointment. The applicant was promoted on 03.07.2020 while respondent No.2 was promoted on 08.07.2019 and were appointed to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer on respective dates. As such the applicant has been assigned lower seniority ranking."

¶35

Mr. M. V. Vedamurthy, the learned counsel for

¶36

the petitioner, submits that the petitioner's promotion was deferred subject to a sealed cover procedure and that on the conclusion of the disciplinary proceedings, the petitioner is admitted to promotion on 03.07.2020, and therefore, he should have been promoted with effect from an earlier date. Mr. Vikas Rojipura, the learned Additional Government Advocate, while inviting this Court's attention to Rule 2 of the Karnataka Government Servants' (Seniority) Rules, 1957, submits that in terms of these Rules, the determinative date would be

¶37

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:45099-DB WP No. 12387 of 2025

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

the date of appointment as observed by the Tribunal and if the petitioner has not called in question the decision to promote him with effect from 03.07.2020, he cannot have a grievance, as observed by the Tribunal, with he being placed in the seniority list after the second respondent, who is promoted on 08.07.2019.

¶40

This Court must observe that the petitioner, in accepting his promotion as an Assistant Executive Engineer with effect from 03.07.2020, has allowed the determinative date to be such for seniority. The date of appointment to the concerned post, as rightly observed by the Tribunal in Paragraph No.10, must be counted for seniority. Therefore, the petitioner cannot be permitted, in the guise of challenging the seniority, to challenge the date of promotion. As such, this Court finds that there is no reason for interference with the order dated 19.03.2025 in

¶41

¶42

NC: 2025:KHC:45099-DB WP No. 12387 of 2025

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

Application No.1720/2024 and the petition stands

¶45

rejected.

¶46

Sd/(B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE

¶47