Sri Linganna Gundalli Vs the Additional Chief Secretary

SRI LINGANNA GUNDALLI S/O GURUPADAPPA KUCHABAL, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, OCCUPATION: JOINT CONTROLLER OF FINANCE, WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, BENGALURU-560001, R/AT NO.134, 7^TH MAIN, 9^TH CROSS, MAHAGANAPATHINAGAR, WEST OF CHORD ROAD, RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU-560010.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

Digitally signed by MARIGANGAIAH PREMAKUMARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

(BY SRI. V.LAKSHMINARAYANA, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI. DIVYATEJ H.N., ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY FINANCE DEPARTMENT (EXCISE), VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001.

¶15

THE PRINCIPAL DIRECTOR, KARNATAKA STATE AUDIT AND ACCOUNTS DEPARTMENT, T.T.M.C. BUILDING, 'A' BLOCK, BMTC SHANTHINAGARA, BENGALURU- 560027.

¶16

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:33262-DB WP No. 24374 of 2025

¶17

HC-KAR

¶18

CHIEF COMMISSIONER, BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, HUDSON CIRCLE, BENGALURU- 560001.

¶19

SRI. GURUBASAVEGOWDA, S/O SRI. EREGOWDA, AGED 50 YEARS, JOINT CONTROLLER OF ACCOUNTS, STATE ACCOUNTS DEPARTMENT, WORKING AS CHIEF AUDITOR, BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, 3^RD FLOOR, B.B.M.P COMMERCIAL COMPLEX, SUBHASHNAGAR (MAJESTIC), BEHIND UPPARA POLICE STATION, BENGALURU-560001. R/AT DOOR NO.107, ANJANADRI RESIDENCE, MARENAHALLI ROAD, VIJAYANAGAR, BENGALURU-560040.

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SRI. V.SHIVAREDDY, AGA FOR R1 TO R3; SRI K.SATISH, ADVOCATE FOR R4)

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED FINAL ORDER PASSED BY THE HON’BLE KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL AT BENGALURU IN APPLICATION No.2189/2025 DATED 17.07.2025 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.

¶23

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

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND

¶25

3 -

¶26

NC: 2025:KHC:33262-DB WP No. 24374 of 2025

¶27

HC-KAR

¶28

ORAL ORDER

¶29

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT)

¶30

Petitioner who was respondent No.4 before the Tribunal in Application No.2189/2025 is before this Court, aggrieved by the order dated 17.07.2025 in the said application, allowing the Applicant/fourth respondent’s challenge to order of transfer dated 09.05.2025 (Annexure-A4).

¶31

Heard learned senior counsel

¶32

Sri.V.Lakshminarayana for Sri.H.N.Divyatej, learned counsel for petitioner, learned Additional Government Advocate Sri.V.Shivareddy for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and learned counsel Sri.K.Satish for respondent No.4. Perused the entire writ petition papers. The parties shall be referred to hereinafter as per the rank they hold before this Court.

¶33

Learned senior counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner herein who was the fourth

¶34

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:33262-DB WP No. 24374 of 2025

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

respondent before the Tribunal and respondent No.4 herein who was the applicant before the Tribunal are in the cadre of Joint Controller of Accounts in the State Accounts Department. The petitioner who was working as Joint Controller of Accounts in the Women and Child Development Department was posted to the place of the Respondent No.4 at BBMP under notification dated 09.05.2025 (Annexure-A4) in public interest. The Tribunal without appreciating the fact that the transfer and posting of the fourth respondent as well as the applicant is in the interest of public, that too, in the general transfer period with the approval of the Chief Minister, committed an error in allowing the application. Learned senior counsel would further submit that the Tribunal also committed a grave error in directing the official respondents to provide suitable posting to the petitioner herein. It is submitted that if at all the Tribunal found fault with the impugned transfer order, the petitioner ought to have been directed to continue at the third respondent’s office, as the

¶37

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:33262-DB WP No. 24374 of 2025

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

petitioner also has not completed his tenure in the said post. Learned senior counsel would also submit that there are serious allegations against the Respondent No. 4 herein and he was earlier suspended. Therefore, taking note of the above, the Tribunal ought not to have interfered with the impugned order of transfer. Moreover, he submits that the order of transfer which would not affect the condition of service shall not be interfered with lightly. Thus, learned senior counsel would pray for allowing the writ petition.

¶40

Per contra, learned counsel Sri.K.Satish for the respondent No.4 herein would support the order passed by the Tribunal by submitting that the petitioner and respondent No.4 herein belong to Group-A category have been provided with minimum tenure of two years. Since the respondent No.4 had not completed his tenure of two years, the Tribunal was justified in quashing the transfer order. Learned counsel would submit that there is neither pending departmental enquiry nor there is allegation as

¶41

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:33262-DB WP No. 24374 of 2025

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

contended by learned senior counsel for the petitioner. Moreover, he submits that no reasons are recorded for premature transfer of the Respondent No. 4, though it is approved by the Chief Minister. The transfer is contrary to the Government order dated 25.06.2024. Thus, it is prayed for dismissal of the writ petition.

¶44

Learned Additional Government Advocate reiterating the factual position, prays for passing appropriate order.

¶45

Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusal of the entire writ petition papers, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Tribunal for the following reasons:

¶46

Admittedly, fourth respondent herein was posted to BBMP vide notification dated 26.07.2023 which was the subject matter of application No.3310/2023 before the Tribunal and took charges of the post only on 29.11.2023.

¶47

7 - NC: 2025:KHC:33262-DB WP No. 24374 of 2025

¶48

HC-KAR

¶49

Admittedly, the fourth respondent has not completed his tenure of two years at BBMP.

¶50

The Government order dated 25.06.2024

¶51

provides minimum tenure of two years to Group-A officers. In that view of the matter, the Tribunal is right in holding that the Respondent No.4 herein has not even completed 1 ½ years in the present post and the Petitioner has been posted in place of the Respondent No. 4 prematurely without any valid reason and without any public interest. Though the transfer is approved by the Chief Minister, no cogent reasons are recorded for premature transfer of the Respondent No.4. Though the Petitioner contended that there is a complaint and on earlier occasion the Respondent No. 4 herein was suspended, the same is not the reason for the Respondent No. 4’s transfer. Therefore, the said contention would not merit any consideration.

¶52

8 - NC: 2025:KHC:33262-DB WP No. 24374 of 2025

¶53

HC-KAR

¶54

The petitioner herein contended that his tenure at the Women and Children Development is also not completed and as such, the Tribunal committed grave error in directing the official respondents to provide suitable posting to the Petitioner. Admittedly, the petitioner herein was posted to work as Joint Controller of Accounts, Women and Child Development Department under order dated 15.03.2024 and as such he has not completed his tenure at the said post. However, it is noticed from the impugned order that by notification dated 02.04.2025, the Petitioner was posted as Chief Financial Officer, Karnataka Rural Infrastructure Development Limited, Bengaluru and they modified the said order under impugned order and posted him to BBMP in the place of Respondent No. 4 herein.

¶55

Therefore, in the light of the above facts, it is open for the Petitioner to make representation to the first and second respondents requesting to continue him as Joint Controller of Accounts, Women and Child

¶56