Dismissed¶97

Smt Geetha N v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC17 Apr 2026WP/11842/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Interim stay of excise inspector transfer orders refused; Karnataka HC DB rejects writ petitions under Articles 226/227 against KSAT orders in Application Nos.2096-2102/2026; non-joinder of successor officers who took charge defeats interim relief; legality of transfers under proviso to Rule 5(2) and Rule 4 of Karnataka Civil Services (Excise Department Officers and Officials Transfer) Rules, 2025, and compliance with DB decision in W.P.No.29579/2025 (dated 20.02.2026), left to Tribunal's main applications; quashed eligibility lists dated 23.07.2025 and 24.07.2025 referenced by counsel.

What did the court decide?

On hearing counsel and perusal of the writ petition papers, the Court is not inclined to interfere with the interim order passed by the Tribunal and the writ petitions are liable to be rejected. ¶90

Smt Geetha N Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶97

Issue for consideration

Whether the High Court should interfere with the Tribunal's orders refusing interim stay of the transfer orders dated 25.03.2026 and grant interim relief to the petitioners. +2 more

¶90

Court's answer

On hearing counsel and perusal of the writ petition papers, the Court is not inclined to interfere with the interim order passed by the Tribunal and the writ petitions are liable to be rejected.

¶90

Ratio / Principle

Answering the petitioners' contentions at the interim stage would make the pending applications before the Tribunal infructuous; therefore those contentions are to be answered by the Tribunal while considering the main applications, and the Court declines to consider them.

¶91

Key takeaways

Because the persons posted to the places of the petitioners under Annexures-R1, R2 and R3 dated 25.03.2026 have taken charge and were not brought on record, it would not be appropriate for the Court to pass any interim order in favour of the petitioners; though the Court would normally offer an opportunity to arraign necessary parties, the contentions must be considered by the Tribunal in the main applications where the affected parties are already before it.ratio¶96

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Karnataka (Division Bench of S.G. Pandit and K.V. Aravind, JJ.; oral order per S.G. Pandit, J.), dated 17.04.2026, rejected W.P. Nos. 11842 and 12119 of 2026 (S-KSAT), filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging orders of the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, Bengaluru that refused interim stay of transfer orders dated 25.03.2026 of Inspectors of Excise. Held: (i) the petitioners' contentions — that transfers under the proviso to Rule 5(2) of the Karnataka Civil Services (Excise Department Officers and Officials Transfer) Rules, 2025 had to be effected by counseling under Rule 4, were opposed to the Division Bench decision dated 20.02.2026 in W.P.No.29579/2025 and connected matters, and were issued on quashed eligibility lists dated 23.07.2025 and 24.07.2025 — could not be answered at the interim stage, as doing so would render the main applications before the Tribunal infructuous; and (ii) since the persons posted in place of the petitioners (Annexures-R1 to R3, dated 25.03.2026) had taken charge and were not impleaded, it was not appropriate to pass any interim order in the petitioners' favour. Writ petitions stood rejected.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:21192-DB WP No. 11842 of 2026 C/W WP No. 12119 of 2026

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT

¶8

AND

¶9

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND WRIT PETITION NO. 11842 OF 2026 (S-KSAT) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 12119 OF 2026 (S-KSAT)

¶10

IN WP NO. 11842/2026

¶11

BETWEEN:

¶12

SMT. GEETHA N W/O. LATE RAVI K. S., AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, WAS WORKING AS INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, CHANNAPATTANA RANGE, OPPOSITE TO CHANNAPATTANA JMFC COURT, BANGALORE SOUTH DISTRICT-562 160 R/AT NO.2138, 31^ST CROSS, D GROUP LAYOUT, MUDDINAPALYA ROAD, VISHWANEEDAM POST, BANGALORE - 560 091 PH: 8951226156 EMAIL ID: [email protected]

¶13

Digitally signed by NANJUNDACHARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

SRI. MADHUSUDANA L., S/O. H. LAKSHMINARASIMHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, WAS WORKING AS INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, RANGE - 22, SAMPANGIRAMANAGAR, NIRMAN BHAVAN, GROUND FLOOR, RAJAJINAGAR, BANGALORE-560 010 PERMANENTLY RESIDING AT NO.1403, K.H.B. PLATINUM APARTMENT, KENGERI SATELLITE TOWN, BANGALORE 560060 PH 9964485866 EMAIL ID: [email protected]

¶15

SRI. MALLAPPA BANUVALLI, S/O. KUSHIYAPPA,

¶16

¶17

NC: 2026:KHC:21192-DB WP No. 11842 of 2026 C/W WP No. 12119 of 2026

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, WAS WORKING AS INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, RANGE NO.15, PEENYA, BUD - 03, NO.14, HOSAHALLI, GOLLARAPALYA, MAGADI ROAD, BANGALORE-560 091 RESIDING AT NO.2, OLD NO.7, 7^TH CROSS, J. S. NAGAR, SARASWATHIPURAM, NANDINI LAYOUT, BANGALORE- 560 096 PH: 9686659789 EMAIL ID: [email protected]

¶20

SRI. LANKEHANUMAIAH K S/O. ANJANAIAH K. C., AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, WAS WORKING AS INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, RANGE NO.071, TUMAKURU SOUTH RANGE, GANDHI NAGAR, TUMAKURU TOWN, TUMAKURU - 572 102, R/AT DODDABELAVANGALA, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-561 204. PH: 9008958509 EMAIL ID: [email protected]

¶21

SMT. BHAGYA W/O. SIDDAPPA H. L., AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, WORKING AS INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, OFFICE OF THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, NO.02, 2^ND FLOOR, WARD NO. 58, VISHWAMAANAVA DOUBLE ROAD, RAMAKRISHNANAGARA, DATTAGALLI, MYSORE DIVISION, MYSORE-570 022 R/AT DOOR NO.1087, SHIVASHAKTHI NILAYA, 2^ND STAGE, JSS LAYOUT, MYSORE-570 028 PH: 9945374962 EMAIL ID: [email protected]

¶22

SMT. SUSHMA K., W/O. K. T. SURESH BABU, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, WAS WORKING AS INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, SHANTINAGAR RANGE 25, BUD 4, 51/1, 46^TH CROSS,

¶23

NC: 2026:KHC:21192-DB WP No. 11842 of 2026 C/W WP No. 12119 of 2026

¶24

¶25

HC-KAR

¶26

SARAKKI MAIN ROAD, JAYANAGARA 8^TH BLOCK, BANGALORE- 560 070 R/AT NO.201, N K HOMES, R K MATA LAYOUT, VEERASWAMY GARDEN, BANGALORE - 560 019. PH: 9448844650 EMAIL ID: [email protected]

¶27

…PETITIONERS

¶28

(BY SRI. M.S. BHAGWATH, SR. ADV. FOR SRI SATISH K., ADV.)

¶29

AND:

¶30

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE (EXCISE), VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE- 560 001.

¶31

THE COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF EXCISE, TTMC BLOCK, BMTC BUILDING, SHANTINAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 027.

¶32

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

¶33

SRI. GIREESHA K. C., S/O. CHUDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, PRESENTLY WORKING AS INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, KIKKERI FARM FOOD AND BEVERAGES (FRUITS) PVT LTD, SHIVAMOGGA (W025), SHIVAMOGGA - RD27, PERMANENTLY RESIDING AT NO.60B, BELADINAGALAU NILAYA, 7^TH CROSS, CHANDRA LAYOUT, BANGALORE-560 040.

¶34

…RESPONDENTS

¶35

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

¶36

¶37

NC: 2026:KHC:21192-DB WP No. 11842 of 2026 C/W WP No. 12119 of 2026

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS FROM THE KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE IN RESPECT OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 07.04.2026 PASSED IN APPLICATION NOS. 2096-2102/2026 (ANNEXURE-A) AND ETC.

¶40

IN WP NO. 12119/2026

¶41

BETWEEN:

¶42

SRI GIREESHA K C S/O. CHUDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, PRESENTLY WORKING AS INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, KIKKERI FARM FOOD AND BEVERAGES (FRUITS) PVT. LTD., SHIVAMOGGA (W025), SHIVAMOGGA- RD27, PERMANENTLY R/AT NO.60B, BELADINAGALAU NILAYA, 7^TH CROSS, CHANDRA LAYOUT, BANGALORE-560 040.

¶43

...PETITIONER

¶44

(BY SRI. H S PRASHANTH, ADV.)

¶45

AND:

¶46

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE (EXCISE), VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560 001.

¶47

THE COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF EXCISE, TTMC BLOCK, BMTC BUILDING, SHANTINAGAR, BANGALORE- 560 027.

¶48

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

¶49

SMT. GEETHA N., W/O. LATE RAVI K. S., AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,

¶50

NC: 2026:KHC:21192-DB WP No. 11842 of 2026 C/W WP No. 12119 of 2026

¶51

¶52

HC-KAR

¶53

WAS WORKING AS INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, CHANNAPATTANA RANGE, OPPOSITE TO CHANNAPATTANA JMFC COURT, BANGALORE SOUTH DISTRICT-562 160.

¶54

R/AT NO. 2138, 31^ST CROSS, D GROUP LAYOUT, MUDDINAPALYA ROAD, VISHWANEEDAM POST, BANGALORE 560091 PH:8951226156 EMAIL ID: [email protected]

¶55

SRI. MADHUSUDANA L., S/O. H. LAKSHMINARASIMHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, WAS WORKING AS INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, RANGE - 22, SAMPANGIRAMANAGAR, NIRMAN BHAVAN, GROUND FLOOR, RAJAJINAGAR, BANGALORE -560010 PERMANENTLY RESIDING AT NO.1403, K.H.B. PLATINUM APARTMENT, KENGERI SATELLITE TOWN, BANGALORE - 560 060 PH: 9964485866 EMAIL ID: [email protected]

¶56

SRI. MALLAPPA BANUVALLI, S/O. KUSHIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, WAS WORKING AS INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, RANGE NO.15, PEENYA, BUD-03, NO.14, HOSAHALLI, GOLLARAPALYA, MAGADI ROAD, BANGALORE 560 091. RESIDING AT NO.2, OLD NO.7, 7^TH CROSS, J. S. NAGAR, SARASWATHIPURAM, NANDINI LAYOUT, BANGALORE - 560 096. PH: 9686659789 EMAIL ID: [email protected]

¶57

SRI. LANKEHANUMAIAH K., S/O. ANJANAIAH. K. C., AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, WAS WORKING AS INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, RANGE NO.071, TUMAKURU SOUTH RANGE, GANDHI NAGAR, TUMAKURU TOWN,

¶58

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:21192-DB WP No. 11842 of 2026 C/W WP No. 12119 of 2026

¶59

HC-KAR

¶60

TUMAKURU - 572 102. RESIDING AT DODDABELAVANGALA, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT 561204 PH: 9008958509. EMAIL ID: [email protected]

¶61

SMT . BHAGYA, W/O. SIDDAPPA H. L., AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, WORKING AS INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, OFFICE OF THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, NO.02, 2^ND FLOOR, WARD NO.58, VISHWAMAANAVA DOUBLE ROAD, RAMAKRISHNANAGARA, DATTAGALLI, MYSORE DIVISION, MYSORE-570 022 RESIDING AT DOOR NO.1087, SHIVASHAKTHI NILAYA, 2^ND STAGE, JSS LAYOUT, MYSORE - 570 028. PH: 9945374962 EMAIL ID: [email protected]

¶62

SMT. SUSHMA K W/O. K. T. SURESH BABU, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, WAS WORKING AS INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, SHANTINAGAR RANGE - 25, BUD - 4, 51/1, 46^TH CROSS, SARAKKI MAIN ROAD, JAYANAGARA 8^TH BLOCK, BANGALORE - 560 070 R/AT NO.201, N K HOMES, R K MATA LAYOUT, VEERASWAMY GARDEN, BANGALORE - 560 019 PH:9448844650 EMAIL ID:[email protected] ...RESPONDENTS

¶63

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

¶64

THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS FROM THE KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN RESPECT OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 07/04/2026 PASSED IN APPLICATION NOS.2102/2026 (ANNEXURE-

¶65

7 - NC: 2026:KHC:21192-DB WP No. 11842 of 2026 C/W WP No. 12119 of 2026

¶66

HC-KAR

¶67

A) AND SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 07/04/2026 PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE IN APPLICATION NO.2102/2026 IN SO FAR AS NONGRANT OF INTERIM ORDER OF STAY AS SOUGHT FOR BY THE PETITIONERS ARE CONCERNED (ANNEXURE-A) AND CONSEQUENTLY GRANT INTERIM RELIEF AS PRAYED FOR BY THE PETITIONER IN APPLICATION NO.2102/2026 (ANNEXURE-B) AND ETC.

¶68

THESE PETITIONS ARE COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶69

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

¶70

ORAL ORDER

¶71

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

¶72

In Writ Petition No.12119/2026, the petitioner is

¶73

before this Court aggrieved by order dated 02.04.2026 in Application No.2102/2026 passed by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal at Bengaluru (for short, ‘the Tribunal’) by which the petitioner’s interim prayer to stay the impugned order of transfer dated 25.03.2026 is rejected, whereas petitioners in W.P.No.11842/2026 are before this Court aggrieved by rejection of their interim prayer by order dated 07.04.2026 refusing to stay the impugned transfer order dated 25.03.2026.

¶74

8 - NC: 2026:KHC:21192-DB WP No. 11842 of 2026 C/W WP No. 12119 of 2026

¶75

HC-KAR

¶76

Heard learned senior counsel Sri.M.S.Bhagwath for Sri.K.Satish, learned counsel for petitioners in W.P.No.11482/2026 as well as learned counsel Sri.H.S.Prashanth for petitioners in W.P.No.12119/2026 and learned Additional Advocate General Sri.Reuben Jacob

¶77

along with learned Additional Govvernment Advocate Sri.V.Shivareddy for respondents-State.

¶78

Learned senior counsel Sri.M.S.Bhagwath would submit that the impugned order of transfer dated 25.03.2026 is opposed to the decision of the Division Bench of this Court dated 20.02.2026 in W.P.No.29579/2025 and connected matters . Further,

¶79

learned senior counsel would contend that the order of transfer is issued based on the quashed eligibility list dated 23.07.2025 and 24.07.2025. Further, learned senior counsel would submit that the transfers under Proviso to 5(2) of the Karnataka Civil Services (Excise Department Officers and Officials Transfer) Rules, 2025 (for short, ‘Rules, 2025’) shall be in accordance with Rule 4 and only

¶80

9 - NC: 2026:KHC:21192-DB WP No. 11842 of 2026 C/W WP No. 12119 of 2026

¶81

HC-KAR

¶82

by counseling. It is submitted that no fresh counseling has

¶83

taken place to transfer the petitioners. Therefore, he submits that the impugned order of transfer is contrary to Rules 2025.

¶84

Learned Additional Advocate General

¶85

Sri.Reuben Jacob before answering the above contentions, raised preliminary objection that without making the persons who are posted in place of the petitioners who have taken charge in pursuance to the posting order which are placed at placed at Annexures-R1, R2 and R3 dated 25.03.2026, the petitioner would not be maintainable. Thus, he would submit that in the absence of persons who would be affected by the orders passed in these writ petitions, the prayer of the petitioners cannot be considered. However, answering to the contentions raised by the learned senior counsel Sri.M.S.Bhagwath, learned Additional Advocate General Sri.Reuben Jacob would submit that whenever the transfers are effected under

¶86

10 - NC: 2026:KHC:21192-DB WP No. 11842 of 2026 C/W WP No. 12119 of 2026

¶87

HC-KAR

¶88

proviso to Rule 5 of Rules, 2025, Rule 4 would not apply. As such, he justifies the action of the respondent-State.

¶89

Having heard the learned counsel appearing for

¶90

the parties and on perusal of the entire writ petition papers, we are not inclined to interfere with the interim order passed by the Tribunal and the writ petitions are liable to be rejected, for the following reasons:

¶91

Answering the contentions raised by the petitioners at the interim stage would make the applications before the Tribunal infructuous. Therefore, the contentions raised herein are to be answered by the Tribunal while considering the main applications. However, we decline to consider the above contentions moreso for the ground that the petitioners have failed to arraign the persons who would be affected by any order that would be passed in these writ petitions.

¶92

Admittedly, on the transfer of the petitioners

¶93

under Annexures-R1, R2 and R3 dated 25.03.2026, the

¶94

11 - NC: 2026:KHC:21192-DB WP No. 11842 of 2026 C/W WP No. 12119 of 2026

¶95

HC-KAR

¶96

persons stated therein have been posted to the places of the petitioners and those persons have taken charge. In the absence of those persons before the Court, it would not be appropriate for this Court to pass any interim order in favour of the petitioners. Normally, this Court would provide an opportunity to the petitioners to arraign the necessary parties. However, in the instant case, even otherwise, contentions urged are required to be considered by the Tribunal in the main applications pending before the Tribunal, where the affected parties are before the Tribunal.

¶97

With the above, writ petitions stand rejected.

¶98

Sd/(S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE

¶99

Sd/(K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE

¶100

NC CT:bms List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26

Smt Geetha N v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Geetha N v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mudur Vyavasaya Seva Sahakari Sangha Ltd., Vs the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)

Katapady Co. Operative Agricultural Society Ltd., Vs the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)

Karnataka State Co-Opeartive Vs the Asst. Director of Income Tax

Lohitha K S Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Pradeep Kumar Y Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Gireesh T S Vs State of Karnataka