Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 1]

Karnataka High Court

Shri Banu Beerappa Harikantra vs The State Of Karnataka on 23 August, 2013

Equivalent citations: 2014 (3) AKR 181

Author: N.Kumar

Bench: N.Kumar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

     DATED THIS THE 23rd DAY OF AUGUST 2013

                       PRESENT

        THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.KUMAR
                       AND
     THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. SURI APPA RAO

      WRIT PETITION NO.34081/2013(S-KAT)

BETWEEN :

Shri. Banu Beerappa Harikantra
S/o. Beerappa Harikantra
Aged about 59 years
Occ: Gazetted Manager
Office of the Deputy Conservator of Forests
Yellapur Sub Division, Yellapur
Uttara Kannada District 585 205        ...PETITIONER

      (By Sri. Vigneshwar S. Shastri, Adv.)

AND :

1.    The State of Karnataka,
      By its Principal Secretary,
      Forest and Environment
      Department, M.S. Building,
      Dr. Ambedkar Veedhi
      Bangalore 560 001

2.    The Principal Chief
      Conservator of Forests
      Head of Forest Force
      Aranya Bhavan, Malleswaram
      Bangalore 560 003

3.    The Chief Conservator of Forests
      Canara Circle, Sirsi
      Uttara Kannada District 585 508
                            -2-




4.   The Deputy Conservator of Forests
     Yellapur Division, Yellapur,
     Uttara Kannada District 585 205

5.   Shri Poojar K.G.
     Major
     Gazetted Manager
     Office of the Principal
     Chief Conservator of Forests,
     Bellary Circle, Bellary - 585 198

     Presently working at:
     Office of the Principal
     Chief Conservator of Forests
     Head of Forest Force
     Aranya Bhavan,
     Malleswaram
     Bangalore 560 003            ...RESPONDENTS

     (By Smt. S. Susheela, AGA for R-1 to R-4
         Sri.S.S. Halalli, Adv. for C/R-5)

                        . . . .

     This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and
227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the
order passed by the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal,
Bangalore, dated 4.7.2013 in application No.3648/2013
as per Annexure-C.

     This writ petition coming on for orders, this day,
N.Kumar J., made the following:



                        ORDER

Learned Government Advocate is directed to take notice for respondents 1 to 4.

-3-

2. This writ petition is filed challenging the order passed by the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal declining to interfere with the order of transfer of the petitioner to Raichur.

3. The petitioner is working as a gazetted Manager at the office of the Deputy Conservator of Forest, Yellapur Division, Yellapur from 12.08.2010. The 2nd respondent passed an order dated 28.06.2013 transferring him to the Office of the Chief Conservator of Forests, Raichur Division before the expiry of his period, from the date he took charge at Yellapur. The 5th respondent has been posted in his place at Yellapur. Challenging the said order of transfer, the petitioner approached the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal. The Tribunal granted an interim order of stay. Subsequently the impugned order came to be passed, on the ground that the petitioner has completed his term at Yellapur as on 12.08.2013 and therefore, he cannot insist that it should be continued any further. Aggrieved by the said order, the writ petition is filed. -4-

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that though he completed thirteen years of service as on 12.08.2010, he has got hardly 1½ years time to attain the age of superannuation. In these circumstances, he is entitled to stay in the said place as is clear from the Circular issued by the Government as per Annexure `A1' and therefore, he submits that he ought to have been continued and the order of transfer is bad.

5. The said Circular enables the authorities to continue an employee if, they choose to do so after the expiry of the period prescribed for the tenure of a Government Official. They are not bound to do so. It all depends on the facts of the case and the circumstances under which the Government employee is placed. Therefore, it cannot be said that the petitioner, as a matter of right is entitled to continue in the said place till he attains the age of superannuation. In that view of the matter, we do not see any merit in this writ petition. Even now it is open to the petitioner to make a representation to the authorities bringing to their notice -5- the fact of his superannuation within 1½ years and also the fact that his wife is suffering from mental ailment and mother is 80 years old and he himself is suffering from diabetes and that as his wife is now taking treatment at Shimoga, he could be accommodated in a nearby place.

If such a representation is given, the authorities shall consider his representation liberally taking into consideration his service to the Institution.

Petition is disposed of accordingly.

6. Learned Government Advocate is permitted to file memo of appearance within four weeks.

Sd/-

JUDGE Sd/-

JUDGE SPS