Sri Prakash S Vs State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

Sri Prakash S Vs State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No substantive relief on the prayers; the petition was disposed of with observations reserving liberty to the petitioner to seek interim orders on parity with those protected in WP No.29768/2025 [S-KSAT] in the event of precipitous action following an adverse decision in Application No.3410/2025.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner can call in question the Tribunal's order in OA No.3407/2025 dated 25.09.2025, which does not relate to him. +1 more

Court's answer

These submissions must prevail and there can be no interference at the petitioner's instance with the Tribunal's order in OA No.3407/2025, as that order does not relate to the petitioner.

Ratio / Principle

Likewise no interference with the order dated 25.09.2025: consequential transfer orders have to be issued, but cannot be issued until the petitioner's pending application is decided by the Tribunal.

Key takeaways

If the petitioner fails in his pending application with the Tribunal and the respondents take any precipitous action, he will be at liberty to seek interim orders on parity with those already protected by this Court in WP No.29768/2025 [S-KSAT].obiter¶¶65

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Oral Order of the Division Bench (Hon'ble Mr. Justice B M Shyam Prasad, author, and Hon'ble Mr. Justice T.M.Nadaf) dated 13.10.2025 disposing of Writ Petition No.30591 of 2025 (S-KSAT) filed under Article 227 by Sri Prakash S, Inspector of Excise. The petitioner prayed (i) to declare the transfer order/Official Memorandum dated 25.09.2025 (Annexure-E) issued by Respondent No.2 — which included his name/ranking contrary to the Tribunal's interim order dated 24.07.2025 in Application No.3410/2025 — non-est, void and unenforceable, and (ii) for permission to challenge and quash by certiorari the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal's order dated 25.09.2025 in Application/OA No.3407/2025. The Court held that neither the Tribunal's order in OA No.3407/2025 nor the order dated 25.09.2025 could be interfered with at the petitioner's instance, since OA No.3407/2025 does not relate to him and consequential transfer orders cannot be issued until his pending Application No.3410/2025 (already heard and reserved for orders) is decided. Observing that, if he fails in that application and the respondents act precipitately, he may seek interim orders on parity with those already protected in WP No.29768/2025 [S-KSAT], the Court disposed of the petition and its pending applications.

1 -

NC: 2025:KHC:40402-DB WP No. 30591 of 2025

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD

AND

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF WRIT PETITION NO. 30591 OF 2025 (S-KSAT)

BETWEEN:

SRI PRAKASH S

S/O LATE K SRINIVASA

AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,

WORKING AS INSPECTOR OF EXCISE.

RANGE NO.43, VIVEK NAGAR, BUD 07,

NO.603/604, 26^TH CROSS, 9^TH MAIN,

7^TH SECTOR, HSR LAYOUT, BANGALORE - 560 102. RESIDING AT NO.2, NEAR WATER TANK,

Digitally signed by MADHUSHREE H Location: High Court of Karnataka

DODDANEKKUNDI VILLAGE,

BANGALORE - 560 037

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. V. LAKSHMINARAYANA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SMT. ANUSHA L., ADVOCATE)

AND:

STATE OF KARNATAKA

REP. BY ITS ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY. FINANCE DEPARTMENT (EXCISE) VIDHANA SOUDHA, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001.

THE COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF EXCISE,

2 -

NC: 2025:KHC:40402-DB WP No. 30591 of 2025

HC-KAR

TTMC BLOCK, BMTC BUILDING, SHANTHINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 027.

THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER (ADMIN), OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, TTMC BLOCK, BMTC BUILDING, SHANTINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 027.

SRI. SOMASHEKARA M R S/O LATE RAMAPPA M AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, WORKING AS INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, RANGE NO.24, ASHOKNAGAR, BUD-04, MONARCH CHAMBERS, NO.122/2, 5^TH FLOOR, INFANTRY ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001. R/A NO.106, VAISHNAVI RATHNAM APARTMENT, Q. BLOCK, JALAHALLI CROSS, BENGALURU - 560 057. …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. REUBEN JACOB., AAG A/W SRI. V. SHIVA REDDY, AGA FOR R1 TO R3)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO i) DECLARE THAT THE ORDER OF TRANSFER DATED 25/09/2025 AS PER (ANNEXURE-E) WHICH HAS BEEN PASSED BY RESPONDENT-2 CONTRARY TO THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 24/07/2025 PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN APPLICATION NO.3410/2025 BY INCLUDING THE NAMES OF THE PETITIONERS IS NON-EST, VOID, UNENFORCEABLE AGAINST THE PETITIONERS AND THE PETITIONERS NAMES SHALL BE DELETED FROM

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:40402-DB WP No. 30591 of 2025

HC-KAR

THE ORDER DATED 25/09/2025, AS PER (ANNEXUREE); ii) GRANT PERMISSION TO CHALLENGE THE ORDER OF THE KAT PASSED IN APPLICATION NO.3407/2025 DATED 25/09/2025 AND BY ISSUING A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 25/09/2025 PASSED IN OA NO.3407/2025 AS (ANNEXURE-A); iii) PASS ANY APPROPRIATE ORDER OR DIRECTION AS DEEMS FIT BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

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

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

ORAL ORDER

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

The petitioner is working as an Inspector of Excise and is party to the pending proceeding in Application No. 3410/2025 with the Karnataka State

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:40402-DB WP No. 30591 of 2025

HC-KAR

Administrative Tribunal [for short, 'the Tribunal' ]. This Court is informed that

[a] the question for consideration in such application is whether the petitioner could be transferred based on new Rules when he is assured of a minimum tenure;

[b] this Court, in the writ petition in W.P.No.22506/2025 [ S-KSAT ] as against the interim order by the Tribunal, has directed the respondents not to pass any final order during pendency of the petitioner's application directing the petitioner to participate in the counselling process; and

[c] the Tribunal has heard the petitioner's application for final disposal and reserved for orders.

The cause for the present writ petition could be found in the undisputed fact that similar

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:40402-DB WP No. 30591 of 2025

HC-KAR

applications by the others are disposed of by the Tribunal which has enabled the respondents to issue transfer order dated 25.09.2025 [ as per Annexure-E] .

The petitioner has also been shown ranking, but indisputably he is not issued with any transfer order. Insofar as the transfer order dated 25.09.2025 for

those who were unsuccessful in their similar applications with the Tribunal, this Court in WP No.29768/2025 [ S-KSAT ] has granted interim order directing the respondents not to relieve those applicants/petitioners till 10.10.2025.

Sri V. Lakshminarayana, the learned

Senior Counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner has called in question the Tribunal's order in Application No.3410/2025 for complete adjudication insofar as the petitioners ranking being shown in the order dated 25.09.2025, but the petitioner's grievance is from the apprehension that if there is any order by the Tribunal in the petitioner's

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:40402-DB WP No. 30591 of 2025

HC-KAR

application, the Official Memorandum dated 25.09.2025 will pave the way for immediate transfer.

Sri Reuben Jacob, the learned Additional Advocate General who appears for Sri A. Shiva Reddy [ the learned Additional Government Advocate who takes notice for the respondents ], submits that the petitioner cannot call in question the Tribunal's order in OA No.3407/2025 as it does not relate to him; and insofar as the apprehension that the order dated 25.09.2025 paves the way for immediate transfer, the learned Additional Advocate General submits that consequential transfer orders have to be issued and those orders cannot be issued until the petitioner's application is decided by the Tribunal.

Indeed, these two submissions must

prevail insofar as the present petition and there cannot be any interference at the petitioner's instance with the Tribunal's order in OA No.3407/2025 or the order dated 25.09.2025. However, this Court must

7 - NC: 2025:KHC:40402-DB WP No. 30591 of 2025

HC-KAR

observe that if indeed the petitioner fails in his pending application with the Tribunal and there is any precipitous action by the respondents, they will be at liberty to seek interim orders on parity with those who are already protected by this Court in WP No.29768/2025 [ S-KSAT ].

The petition stands disposed of with the observations as aforesaid, and consequently, the pending applications also stand disposed of.

Sd/(B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE

Sd/(T.M.NADAF) JUDGE

NV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 61 CT: BRS