Yogesh Kumar. Naik. B. C. Vs State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

Yogesh Kumar. Naik. B. C. Vs State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No relief to the petitioner; with the above observations the writ petition stands disposed of, leaving the petitioner's contentions and the operational/non-operational post question to the Tribunal, with directions to file objections within two weeks and for the Tribunal to endeavour to dispose of the main application.

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition challenging the Tribunal's non-grant of interim relief (refusal to stay the transfer order dated 10.05.2025) should be entertained by the High Court. +1 more

Court's answer

The Court is not inclined to entertain the writ petition because it is directed against an interim order, and the contentions raised by the petitioner are to be considered by the Tribunal.

Ratio / Principle

The Tribunal's observation that the petitioner is working in a non-operational post was made only for the purpose of deciding the interim prayer; the Tribunal shall decide the main application without being influenced by that observation, based on the material placed on record.

Key takeaways

Operative directions: on filing of objections within two weeks thereafter, the Tribunal shall endeavor to dispose of the main application (the State indicated it would file objections by 15.06.2026 and respondent No.3 undertook to file objections likewise).ratio¶49

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Karnataka High Court, Division Bench (S.G. Pandit and Dr. K. Manmadha Rao JJ.; order per S.G. Pandit J.), disposed of a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking certiorari to set aside the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal's order dated 13.05.2026 in Application No.2585/2026 to the extent it declined interim relief (refusal to stay the petitioner's transfer order dated 10.05.2025). Held: the Court would not entertain a petition directed against an interim order, the petitioner's contentions being for the Tribunal to consider; the Tribunal's observation that the petitioner worked in a non-operational post was confined to deciding the interim prayer and the Tribunal must decide the main application uninfluenced by it, on the notifications/materials placed on record. On filing of objections within two weeks (State indicated objections by 15.06.2026; respondent No.3 gave a like undertaking), the Tribunal to endeavour to dispose of the main application. Writ petition disposed of. No precedent cited.

1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:25489-DB WP No. 15596 of 2026

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 1^ST DAY OF JUNE, 2026 PRESENT

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

AND

THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION NO. 15596 OF 2026 (S-KSAT)

BETWEEN:

YOGESH KUMAR NAIK. B. C. S/O SRI CHANDRASHEKAR B. B., AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS PRESENTLY WORKING AS POLICE INSPECTOR BESCOM VIGILANCE, HOSAKOTE POLICE STATION BENGALURU RURAL. ALSO AT NO.250, 1^ST MAIN ROAD, HIG, ‘A’ SECTOR, YELAHANKA UPANAGARA BENGALURU-560064.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. S.RAJASHEKAR, ADV.)

Digitally signed by NANJUNDACHARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

AND:

STATE OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS NO.12, RACE COURSE ROAD, MADHAVA NAGARA, GANDHI NAGAR BENGALURU-560 001 REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.

DIRECTOR GENERAL AND INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, KARNATAKA STATE POLICE HEADQUATERS, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001.

2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:25489-DB WP No. 15596 of 2026

HC-KAR

SRIKANTAYYA B N

S/O NOT KNOW TO THE PETITIONER PRESENTLY WORKING AS POLICE INSPECTOR, HOSAKOTE TRAFFIC POLICE STATION BENGALURU DISTRICT-562 114.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. K.R. RAJENDRA, AGA FOR R1 & R2 SRI VIKRAM HUILGOL, SR. COUNSEL A/W SRI SREENIVASA, ADV. FOR R3)

THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 13.05.2026 PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL AT BENGALURU IN APPLICATION NO.2585/2026 TO THE EXTENT OF NOT GRANTING THE INTERIM RELIEF SOUGHT FOR BY THE PETITIONER VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.

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

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

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO

ORAL ORDER

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

Heard learned counsel Sri.Rajashekar for petitioner,

learned Additional Government Advocate Sri.K.R.Rajendra

for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and learned senior counsel Sri.Vikram Huilgol along with Sri.Sreenivasa, learned counsel for respondent No.3.

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:25489-DB WP No. 15596 of 2026

HC-KAR

Petitioner is before this Court questioning nongrant of interim order by order dated 13.05.2026 in Application No.2585/2026 passed by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal at Bengaluru (for short, ‘the Tribunal’) whereunder the Tribunal refused to stay the impugned order of transfer dated 10.05.2025.

Learned counsel Sri.S.Rajashekar for petitioner would submit that while rejecting the interim prayer of the petitioner, the Tribunal has virtually decided the application of the petitioner by stating that the petitioner herein is working in non-operational post. Further, learned counsel would place reliance on the notification dated 11.09.2003 produced along with memo dated 01.06.2026 to contend that the office in which the petitioner is working is declared as executive post or police station.

We are not inclined to entertain the writ petition

for the reason that the petitioner is before this Court

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:25489-DB WP No. 15596 of 2026

HC-KAR

against an interim order and the contentions raised by the petitioner is to be considered by the Tribunal. Whether the post in which the petitioner is working is operational or non-operational post, is to be decided by the Tribunal based on the notifications or other materials that is to be produced by both sides. The observation made by the Tribunal that the petitioner is working in non-operational post is for the purpose of deciding the interim prayer of the petitioner and without being influenced by such observation, the Tribunal to decide the main application based on the material that would be placed on record.

Learned Additional Government Advocate

Sri.K.R.Rajendra would submit that the State would file objections by the next date i.e., 15.06.2026.

Learned senior counsel Sri.Vikram Huilgol would also undertake that respondent No.3 would also file objections by that time.

5 -

NC: 2026:KHC:25489-DB WP No. 15596 of 2026

HC-KAR

On filing of objections within two weeks

thereafter, the Tribunal shall endeavor to dispose of the main application.

With the above observations, writ petition

stands disposed of.

Sd/(S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE

Sd/(DR.K.MANMADHA RAO) JUDGE

NC CT:bms List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3