Sri B Lingegowda vs The State Of Karnataka on 8 June, 2012

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sri B Lingegowda vs The State Of Karnataka on 8 June, 2012

Bench: H. N. Nagamohan Das

                         1



 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

       DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JUNE, 2012

                     BEFORE:

 THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H. N. NAGAMOHAN DAS

       WRIT PETITION NO.17703 OF 2012 (S-TR)

BETWEEN:

SRI. B. LINGEGOWDA
S/O BYRAPPA
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
WORKING AS ASSISTANT
(LAND ACQUISITION SECTION)
HEAD OFFICE
KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA
DEVELOPMENT BOARD (KIADB)
NRUPATHUNGA ROAD
BANGALORE-560 001                   ...   PETITIONER

(BY SRI. A. C. BALARAJ, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
   REPRESENTED BY ITS
   PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO
   GOVERNMENT
   COMMERCE & INDUSTRIES
   DEPARTMENT, VIKASA SOUDHA
   BANGALORE-560 001

2. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND
   EXECUTIVE MEMBER, KIADB
   NRUPATHUNGA ROAD
   BANGALORE-1
                               2



3. SRI. SANJEEVA YELLAPPA UPPAR
   AGED MAJOR
   ASSISTANT, ZONAL OFFICE
   KIADB, BELGAUM            ...            RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. RAGHAVENDRA G. GAYATHRI, HCGP FOR R-1)
(SRI. M. R. NAIK, SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI. BASAVARAJ V.
SABARAD, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3)
                         *****

     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA,
PRAYING TO QUASH THE O.M. DATED 31.5.2012 OF
THE 2ND RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-B IN SO FAR IT
RELATES     TO     TRANSFER       OF    PETITIONER    FROM
BANGALORE        TO   BIDAR       AND   POSTING      OF   3RD
RESPONDENT IN PLACE OF THE PETITIONER ARE
CONCERNED WITH A FURTHER DIRECTION TO THE
RESPONDENTS TO CONTINUE THE PETITIONER IN
PRESENT PLACE AND POST WITH ALL CONSEQUENTIAL
BENEFITS.

     THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING     THIS      DAY,   THE       COURT   MADE       THE
FOLLOWING:-

                         ORDER

Sri. Raghavendra G Gayathri, learned Government Pleader is directed to take notice for respondent No.1. 3

2. In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the order dated 31.05.2012 as per Annexure-B insofar as it relates to transfer of petitioner from Bangalore to Bidar.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner relying on the Government Order dated 22.11.2001 contends that the petitioner is holding Group 'C' post and minimum of five years, he should not be transferred. But, in the instant case within a span of one year, petitioner is transferred.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent dispute this contention. It is contended that right from the inception of entry into service in 1980 till the impugned order passed on 31.05.2012, the petitioner is working in Bangalore. This statement is not disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner. In the circumstances, petitioner is not entitled to take shelter under the Government order dated 22.11.2012.

5. I find no justifiable ground to interfere with the impugned order. Accordingly, the writ petition is hereby dismissed.

Three weeks' time is granted to file memo of appearance.

Sd/-

JUDGE LB/PV

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court