Smt. Vinaya Banakar Vs the State of Karnataka

SMT. VINAYA BANAKAR, W/O SRIKANT V. CHIPPADI, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, WORKING AS GEOLOGIST, OFFICE OF THE SENIOR GEOLOGIST, DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY, VIDYANAGAR, DAVANAGERE 577 004, PH: 9844239579, E MAIL: [email protected].

¶13

(BY SRI SATISH K., ADVOCATE)

¶14

…PETITIONER

¶15

AND:

¶16

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRSENTED BY ITS PRICNIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE,

¶17

VIKASA SOUDHA, BANGALORE 560 001.

¶18

2 -

¶19

NC: 2026:KHC:5763-DB WP No. 22949 of 2025

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

THE DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY, No.49, KHANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD, BANGALORE 560 001.

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SRI VIKAS ROJIPURA, AGA FOR R1 & R2)

¶24

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 21/04/2025 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE IN APPLICATION No.4885/2024 (ANNEXURE-A).

¶25

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

¶26

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

¶27

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND

¶28

ORAL ORDER

¶29

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

¶30

The unsuccessful petitioner before the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, Bengaluru (for short, 'the Tribunal') is before this Court questioning the order dated 21.04.2025 in Application No.4885/2024, wherein the petitioner's prayer to consider her representation dated 16.05.2024 (Annexure-A5),

¶31

to consider her case for placing in independent charge of the post of Senior Geologist under Rule 32 of the Karnataka Civil Service Rules (KCSRs).

¶32

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:5763-DB WP No. 22949 of 2025

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

Heard Sri K. Satish, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Vikas Rojipura, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 2-State.

¶35

Sri K. Satish, learned counsel for the petitioner

¶36

would submit that the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) met on 20.10.2023 and juniors of the petitioner were promoted as Senior Geologists from the cadre of Geologist. As charge sheet was filed against the petitioner in a criminal proceedings, the case of the petitioner was put in a sealed cover. It is submitted that subsequently the petitioner challenged the said charge sheet and taking cognizance, in a criminal petition before this Court, and it is submitted that by order dated 03.10.2023, this Court quashed the order of taking cognizance and remitted the matter back to the Tribunal for fresh consideration.

¶37

3.1 It is submitted that in the meanwhile, on 15.03.2024, her juniors were promoted. Subsequent to promotion of her juniors, by order dated 03.05.2024, the criminal proceedings against the petitioner was closed. It is the

¶38

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:5763-DB WP No. 22949 of 2025

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that on closure of the criminal proceedings, the respondent ought to have opened the sealed cover in respect to petitioner and ought to have given effect to the decision therein. Further, learned counsel would submit that as on this day, there is no impediment for the respondents to open the sealed cover as no departmental enquiry or no criminal proceedings is pending against the petitioner.

¶41

Sri Vikas Rojipura, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 was directed to get instruction with regard to pendency of any other proceedings against the petitioner as on this day. Learned AGA on instruction submits that as on this day, no criminal proceeding or departmental proceeding is pending against the petitioner. However, he submits that the respondentAuthorities are contemplating to refer the matter to the Lokayukta for enquiry. Thus, he would pray for passing appropriate order.

¶42

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the impugned order passed by the Tribunal,

¶43

5 -

¶44

NC: 2026:KHC:5763-DB WP No. 22949 of 2025

¶45

HC-KAR

¶46

we are of the considered opinion that the order passed by the Tribunal on the facts of the present case is wholly erroneous and needs interference.

¶47

The Tribunal without noticing the fact of closure of the criminal proceedings against the petitioner, accepted the submission of learned AGA that Government is intending to challenge the said order. However, as on this day, that the said order of closure of criminal proceedings is not challenged or any other departmental proceeding is pending against the petitioner. In terms of the submission of learned AGA, Government is only intending to refer the matter to Lokayukta for enquiry and as on this day, the matter is not yet referred.

¶48

The observation of the Tribunal that the applicant is not acquitted or exonerated in the criminal proceeding is not correct. As the criminal proceeding itself is closed, the question of acquittal or exoneration would not arise. As there is no pendency of criminal proceeding or departmental proceeding, the respondent-Authorities shall give effect to the decision of the DPC in respect of the petitioner in terms of DPC meeting

¶49