Karnataka High Court
Sri. Shivappa Alakawadi S/O Mallappa vs State Of Karnataka on 27 February, 2018
Bench: A.S.Bopanna, S G Pandit
:1:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2018
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.S.BOPANNA
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT
WRIT PETITION NO.100560/2018 (S-KAT)
BETWEEN
SRI. SHIVAPPA ALAKAWADI
S/O MALLAPPA
AGED: 43 YEARS,
WORKING AS DRIVER,
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT -
OF POLICE, CRE CELL,
DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION BHAVANA,
NAVA NAGAR, BAGALKOT,
BAGALKOT DISTRICT,
RESIDING AT: NO.209, NEAR SAI MANDIR,
MANAGULI COLONY, VIDYAGIRI,
BAGALKOT, BAGALKOT DISTRICT.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI.G.K.HIREGOUDAR, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
HOME DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA,
:2:
BENGLAURU-560001.
2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL &
INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE,
NRUPATHUNGA ROAD,
BENGALURU-560001.
3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
BAGALKOT,
BAGALKOT DISTRICT.
4. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT -
OF POLICE,
DISTRICT CIVIL RIGHT ENFORCEMENT CELL,
BAGALKOT,
BAGALKOT DISTRICT.
5. RESERVE POLICE INSPECTOR
DISTRICT ARMED RESERVE (VEHICLE DIVISION)
BAGALKOT,
BAGALKOT DISTRICT.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. M.KUMAR, ADDL. GOVT. ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SET
ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 11.01.2018 PASSED BY THE
KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL AT
BANGALORE IN APPLICATION NO.179/2018 ANNEXURE-A
AND ALLOW THE APPLICATION AS PRAYED FOR.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, A.S.BOPANNA J., MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
:3:
ORDER
The petitioner is before this Court assailing the order dated 11.01.2018, passed by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal in application No.179/2018. The petitioner was before the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal claiming to be aggrieved by the order dated 15.12.2017, whereunder his earlier order of deputation was recalled and he was repatriated to the parent department. The petitioner therefore claiming to be aggrieved was before the Tribunal. The Tribunal on taking into consideration the contentions has ultimately arrived at the conclusion, which reads as under:
"4. It is evident from the impugned order dated 15.12.2017 passed by the 3rd respondent that due to certain administrative reasons, the services of the applicant have been withdrawn from CRE Cell, Bagalkot and he has been directed to report to his parent department i.e., DAR, Bagalkot. We are of the opinion that, the applicant has no right to continue on deputation if his services are required in the parent department and the deputing authority ie., the 3rd respondent can always withdraw the services based :4: on the need in the parent department. It is also to be noted that, the applicant has not been posted outside Bagalkot and hence, we do not see any hardship caused to him by the impugned order dated 15.12.2017."
2. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner while assailing the order would seek to rely on the circular dated 01.04.2015, keeping in view the nature of deployment on deputation and considering the fact that the Tribunal has taken note of the circular as well and thereafter has arrived at the above conclusion, we have no reason to differ with the conclusion reached by the tribunal.
Hence, we see no merit in this petition, the same is accordingly disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE Sd/-
JUDGE Vnp*/vb