Dr. Shuhabuddin Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

Dr. Shuhabuddin Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition allowed; the Tribunal's order dated 09.12.2025 in Application No.3876/2025 set aside and the application remanded to the Tribunal to consider the same on merits.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Tribunal rightly concluded that Application No.3876/2025 had become infructuous when the suspension was revoked expressly subject to the outcome of that pending application.

Court's answer

When suspension is revoked subject to the outcome of the pending application, the application does not become infructuous and the suspension does not come to an end.

Ratio / Principle

The suspension comes to an end only upon the final decision of the application pending before the Tribunal; the revocation of suspension was only to comply with the interim order passed by the Tribunal.

Key takeaways

The Tribunal erred in dismissing the application as having become infructuous; the order of revocation itself makes clear that revocation was subject to the outcome of Application No.3876/2025.ratio¶¶41
The Tribunal misdirected itself in failing to properly understand the order of revocation of suspension, which led to the filing of this writ petition.ratio¶¶45

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Service law – Suspension and its revocation – Revocation of suspension expressly made subject to the final outcome of Application No.3876/2025 pending before the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal – Where suspension is revoked subject to the outcome of a pending application, the application does not become infructuous and the suspension does not end; the suspension ends only upon final decision of the application, the revocation being merely to comply with the Tribunal's interim order – Tribunal's order dated 09.12.2025 dismissing the application challenging suspension dated 22.08.2025 as infructuous held erroneous – Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 allowed; Tribunal's order set aside and application remanded for consideration on merits.

1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:2541-DB WP No. 887 of 2026

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 PRESENT

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

AND

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND WRIT PETITION NO. 887 OF 2026 (S-KSAT)

BETWEEN:

DR. SHUHABUDDIN S/O LATE G. K. ALTAFF HUSSAIN AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS DISTRICT AYUSH OFFICER DIRECTORATE OF AYUSH (UNDER ORDERS OF SUSPENSION) DHANVANTHRI ROAD BENGALURU-560 009. NOW WORKING AS MEDICAL OFFICER, GOVERNMENT UNANI HOSPITAL, RAMANAGAR, BANGALORE SOUTH DISTRICT.

…PETITIONER

Digitally signed by NANJUNDACHARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

(BY SRI. VIJAYA KUMAR, ADV. (THROUGH VC))

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE SERVICES DEPARTMENT, VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560 001.

THE COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF AYUSH

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:2541-DB WP No. 887 of 2026

HC-KAR

DHANVANTHRI ROAD

BENGALURU-560 009.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.VIKAS ROJIPURA, AGA)

THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO GRANT THE FOLLOWING RELIEFS; 1). SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 09/12/2025 PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN APPLICATION NO.3876/2025 (VIDE ANNEXURE-A) AND ALLOW THE APPLICATION AS PRAYED FOR AND 2.PASS SUCH OTHER ORDER OR DIRECTION.

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 MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND

ORAL ORDER

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

Heard learned counsel Sri.Vijaya Kumar for petitioner through video conference and learned Additional Government Advocate Sri.Vikas Rojipura for respondents. Perused the entire writ petition papers.

The petitioner was before the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal at Bengaluru (for short, ‘the Tribunal’) in Application No.3876/2025 questioning the order of suspension dated 22.08.2025 and to direct the

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:2541-DB WP No. 887 of 2026

HC-KAR

respondent authorities to continue him in the place where he was working. During the pendency of the application, the State Government i.e., respondent No.1 under Government Order bearing No.DPÀÄPÀ 368 ¦nr 2025, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ, ¢£ÁAPÀ: 03.09.2025 (Annexure-C) revoked the order of suspension, subject to the final outcome of Application No.3876/2025 pending before the Tribunal. The operative portion of the Government order dated 30.09.2025 revoking suspension reads as follows:

“¥Àæ¸ÁÛªÀ£ÉAiÀÄ°è «ªÀj¹gÀÄªÀ CA±ÀUÀ¼À »£Éß¯ÉAiÀÄ°è ªÀiÁ£Àå PÀ£ÁðlPÀ DqÀ½vÀ £ÁåAiÀÄ ªÀÄAqÀ½AiÀÄÄ Cfð ¸ÀASÉå:3876/2025gÀ ¥ÀæPÀgÀtzÀ°è ¢£ÁAPÀ: 02.09.2025 gÀAzÀÄ ¤ÃrgÀÄªÀ ªÀÄzsÀåAvÀgÀ DzÉÃ±ÀzÀ£ÀéAiÀÄ ºÁUÀÆ F ¥ÀæPÀgÀtzÀ°è ªÀiÁ£Àå £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄªÀÅ ¤ÃqÀÄªÀ CAwªÀÄ wÃ¦ð£À µÀgÀwÛUÉÆ¼À¥ÀlÄÖ ¥Àæ¸ÀÄÛvÀ CªÀiÁ£ÀwÛ£À°ègÀÄªÀ qÁ.±ÀºÀ§Ä¢ÝÃ£ï, ªÉÊzÁå¢üPÁjUÀ¼ÀÄ (AiÀÄÄ£Á¤) EªÀgÀ CªÀiÁ£ÀvÀÛ£ÀÄß vÉgÀªÀÅUÉÆ½¹ vÀPÀët¢AzÀ eÁjUÉ §gÀÄªÀAvÉ EªÀgÀ£ÀÄß ¸ÉÃªÉUÉ ¥ÀÄ£Àgï ¸ÁÜ¦¹ DzÉÃ²¹zÉ.

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:2541-DB WP No. 887 of 2026

HC-KAR

ªÀÄÄAzÀÄªÀgÉzÀÄ, ¸ÀzÀjAiÀÄªÀjUÉ PË¤ì°AUï

ªÀÄÄSÁAvÀgÀ ¸ÀÜ¼À¤AiÀÄÄQÛUÉÆ½¸ÀÄªÀAvÉ DAiÀÄÄPÀÛgÀÄ, DAiÀÄÄµï

E¯ÁSÉ EªÀjUÉ ¸ÀÆa¸À¯ÁVzÉ.”

A reading of the above would clearly indicate

that in view of the interim order dated 02.09.2025 passed in Application No.3876/2025, first respondent revoked the suspension, subject to the outcome of the Application and continued the petitioner in service. When the same was produced before the Tribunal, the Tribunal under impugned order disposed of the application observing that as the respondents themselves have revoked the suspension order by an administrative order, the status of suspension ends and further it observed that in view of the facts and circumstances and subsequent development, the application is dismissed being infructuous.

The Tribunal erred in dismissing the application

as having become infructuous. The order of revocation of suspension itself makes it clear that the revocation is subject to the outcome of Application No.3876/2025

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:2541-DB WP No. 887 of 2026

HC-KAR

before the Tribunal and the revocation of suspension is to comply with the interim order of stay of suspension. When the suspension is revoked subject to outcome of pending application, it is not known how the Tribunal could come to the conclusion that application has become infructuous.

When the suspension is revoked subject to the outcome of pending application, the application pending before the Tribunal would not become infructuous and suspension would not come to an end. The suspension would come to an end only upon final decision of the application pending before the Tribunal and that revocation is only to comply interim order passed by the Tribunal. It is unfortunate that the Tribunal misdirected itself to properly understand the order of revocation of suspension, which led to filing of this writ petition.

In the above circumstances, we pass the following:

6 -

NC: 2026:KHC:2541-DB WP No. 887 of 2026

HC-KAR

ORDER

a) Writ petition is allowed .

b) Order dated 09.12.2025 in Application No.3876/2025 on the file of the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal at Bengaluru is set aside and the Application is remanded to the Tribunal to consider the same on merits.

Sd/(S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE

Sd/-

(K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE

NC CT:bms List No.: 2 Sl No.: 4