Sri Ninganagouda N. Patil, Vs the State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

Sri Ninganagouda N. Patil, Vs the State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition allowed: impugned Tribunal order dated 13.07.2026 in Application No.3147/2026 quashed; notifications dated 30.05.2026 (Annexure-A8) and 03.07.2026 (Annexure-A9) stayed during pendency of Application No.3147/2026; respondent No.3 directed to hand over charge of Executive Engineer, PWD Division, Haveri to the petitioner forthwith; Tribunal directed to hear Applications Nos.2615/2026 and 3147/2026 together and dispose of them within four weeks from the date the order is brought to its notice, with both sides bound by the Tribunal's eventual order.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal was justified in refusing to stay the notifications dated 30.05.2026 (Annexure-A8) and 03.07.2026 (Annexure-A9) posting respondent No.3 as Executive Engineer in place of the petitioner, such refusal being the impugned order challenged in this writ petition. +1 more

Court's answer

The Tribunal was not justified in refusing to stay the notification dated 30.05.2026 (Annexure-A8) and the notification dated 03.07.2026 (Annexure-A9); it failed to appreciate the manner in which respondent No.3 came to be posted as Executive Engineer, PWD Division, Haveri despite the case being one of repatriation.

Ratio / Principle

The impugned order dated 13.07.2026 in Application No.3147/2026 passed by the Tribunal stands quashed.

Key takeaways

The manner in which the Government acted to issue notification dated 03.07.2026, and the manner in which respondent No.3's posting notified on 22.06.2026 was modified, requires examination; prima facie the notifications appear to have been issued only to favour respondent No.3 and not in public interest — a matter left for the Tribunal to examine while hearing both applications.obiter¶68
Notification dated 22.06.2026 posting respondent No.3 as Deputy Chief Engineer appears to have been made only to get the order of status quo vacated; the conduct and manner of the Government authorities as well as respondent No.3 in the process of issuing notification dated 03.07.2026 is prima facie not appreciable.obiter¶72

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Karnataka (S.G.Pandit J., per; with K.Manmadha Rao J.), 20.07.2026, W.P. No.21970 of 2026 (S-KSAT) under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution: petitioner Ninganagouda N. Patil, Executive Engineer (RDPR cadre) working at PWD Division, Haveri, challenged the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal's order dated 13.07.2026 in Application No.3147/2026 refusing to stay notifications dated 30.05.2026 (No.UÁæC¥À 141 J¸ïJ¸ïPÉ 2026 (E), Annexure-A8) and 03.07.2026 (No.¯ÉÆÃE 104 ¸ÉÃJ¸ÀÄ 2026, Annexure-A9) posting respondent No.3 Sharan Basavaraj (PWD cadre) as Executive Engineer in his place. Earlier, the petitioner's repatriation to RDPR (notification dated 13.05.2026, Annexure-A4) was under challenge in Application No.2615/2026 with status quo granted on 27.05.2026; after respondent No.3 was posted elsewhere on 22.06.2026 (Annexure-A7), the status quo was vacated on 02.07.2026, and he was reposted to the petitioner's place the very next day. Holding the Tribunal 'not justified' in refusing the stay, the Court quashed the Tribunal's order, stayed both notifications during the pendency of Application No.3147/2026, directed respondent No.3 to hand over charge of the post to the petitioner forthwith, and directed the Tribunal to hear Applications Nos.2615/2026 and 3147/2026 together and dispose of them within four weeks, both sides to abide by its result. As prima facie observations (expressly left for examination by the Tribunal), the Court noted that the 22.06.2026 posting appeared designed only to get the status quo vacated, that the subsequent notifications appeared issued only to favour respondent No.3 and not in public interest, and that the conduct of the Government authorities and respondent No.3 was prima facie not appreciable.

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Order dated 13.07.2026 in Application No.3147/2026 passed by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal at Bengaluru, refusing to stay the notifications dated 30.05.2026 (Annexure-A8) and 03.07.2026 (Annexure-A9) posting respondent No.3 as Executive Engineer, PWD Division, Haveri in place of the petitioner and directing the petitioner to report to duty at Government.¶37
Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal at Bengaluru · 13.07.2026
Prior proceeding
Petitioner was posted as Executive Engineer at PWD Sub-Division, Haveri by notification dated 30.09.2024.¶42
Prior proceeding
Under notification dated 13.05.2026 (Annexure-A4), respondent No.3 was posted in place of the petitioner as Executive Engineer, Public Works Department at Haveri, repatriating the petitioner's services to RDPR.¶42
Prior proceeding
The petitioner challenged the 13.05.2026 repatriation notification before the Tribunal in Application No.2615/2026.¶42
Prior proceeding
On 27.05.2026 the Tribunal passed an order of status quo insofar as the repatriation notification dated 13.05.2026.¶42
Prior proceeding
One more notification dated 30.05.2026 (Annexure-A8) was issued by the RDPR withdrawing the petitioner's services from the Public Works Department and directing the petitioner to report to duty at Government for further posting.¶42
Prior proceeding
The 30.05.2026 notification was produced before the Tribunal by respondent No.3 on 16.06.2026 and, taking note of it, the Tribunal continued the order of status quo on 16.06.2026.¶42
Prior proceeding
Under notification dated 22.06.2026 (Annexure-A7), respondent No.3 was posted to another post, i.e., as Deputy Chief Engineer, C and B, Bengaluru South (elsewhere recorded as Executive Engineer, Communications and Buildings, Bengaluru South), in place of Sri.S.V.Surendranath on his retirement.¶56
Prior proceeding
Taking note of respondent No.3's posting to the other post, the Tribunal vacated the order of status quo on 02.07.2026 in Application No.2615/2026.¶46
Prior proceeding
On the next day, under notification dated 03.07.2026 (Annexure-A9), respondent No.3 was again posted in place of the petitioner as Executive Engineer, PWD Sub-Division, Haveri; that notification was the subject matter of Application No.3147/2026, in which the Tribunal, under the order later impugned here, refused to grant a stay.¶46