Karnataka High Court
Smt Leelavathi vs Sri Palaiah on 20 October, 2022
Bench: G.Narendar, P.N.Desai
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2022
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.NARENDAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.DESAI
WRIT PETITION NO.17704/2022 (S-KSAT)
BETWEEN:
V SRIDHAR
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS
S/O LATE G VENKATASWAMY
KMAS OFFICER
WORKING AS
MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER
GRADE-II,
CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL,
MULABAGILU-563131
AND R/AT TEACHERS COLONY,
NEAR NATIONAL HIGHWAY,
MULABAGILU, KOLAR DISTRICT-563131.
... PETITIONER
(BY SMT. M.L.SUVARNA, ADV. FOR
SRI K. PUTTEGOWDA, ADV.)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
DEPARTMENT OF
URBAN DEVELOPMENT,
VIKAS SOUDHA
DR B R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU-560001.
2
2. DIRECTOR
DIRECTORATE OF
MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION,
9TH FLOOR, VISVESVARAYA TOWER,
DR. B R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU-560001.
3. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
MULABAGILU-563131.
4. B S SUMATHI,
MAJOR BY AGE
WORKING AS
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
BBMP,
BOMMANAHALLI DIVISION,
BANGALORE-560068.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI R. SUBRAMANYA, AAG A/W
SRI H.R.SHOWRI, AGA FOR R1 TO R3,
SRI G.M.ANANDA, ADV. FOR C/R-4.)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER
DATED 03.09.2022 PASSED BY THE KSAT AT BANGALORE IN
A.No-3867/2022 (UNDER ANNEXURE-A TO THE WP) BY THE
ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI AND GRANT ALL
CONSEQUENTIAL BENEFITS.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR "PRELIMINARY
HEARING", THIS DAY, G.NARENDAR J, MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Addl. Advocate General along with learned AGA for respondent Nos.1 to 3.
3
2. Learned Addl. Advocate General would file into the Court a memo dated 20.10.2022 and along with the memo, a copy of the letter dated 19.10.2022 addressed by the Director, Department of Municipal Administration to the Urban Development Department requesting for initiating the process for selection and appointment of officers of the Chief Officer Grade - II Cadre.
3. The Director, Department of Municipal Administration also appears to have furnished the clarification sought for by the Department.
4. The memo is taken on record.
5. We hope that the concerned authorities involved in the process of initiating and completing the selection of candidates, expedite the process at the earliest.
6. In fact, this Court by order dated 22.09.2022 had called upon the counsel for the Public Service Commission to secure instructions and learned counsel on 4 the next date of hearing i.e., on 27.09.2022 had filed a memo indicating the time required to complete the process.
7. We hope that the process is taken forward and completed at the earliest in order to make good governance available to the citizens.
8. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.
9. The petitioner is before this Court being aggrieved by the order dated 03.09.2022 passed by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, Benglauru in Application No.3867/2022 whereby the Tribunal postponed the consideration of the interim relief.
10. The petitioner, is one amongst several ineligible candidates, to occupy the office of the Chief Officer, had been disturbed. This Court, after taking note of the findings rendered by the Tribunal that certain candidates, who were in eligible to be posted as Chief Officer had been posted and were discharging duties as Chief Officer, had called upon the Director, Department of Municipal Administration to file 5 an affidavit listing out the candidates and further directed the Director, Department of Municipal Administration to take action.
11. Pursuant to the same the petitioner, who is one amongst the candidates, who have been shifted out of the post. In that view of the matter, we do not find any error warranting our interference.
12. Be that as it may. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner, who was in Kolar is now been disturbed and posted to Chikkamagaluru and that too in the middle of the academic year and submits that it has caused serious hardship to petitioner and his family and hence the petitioner's case may be considered for deployment in the erstwhile post at Kolar itself.
13. It is trite that the reins of administration lies in the hands of the respondent State. Be that as it may, we are of the considered opinion that the grievance of the petitioner could be addressed by granting liberty to the 6 petitioner to make a representation to the Director, Department of Municipal Administration to consider reposting him in the original post in Kolar.
14. In the event, there are any vacancy in his erstwhile place, it is open for the petitioner to make a representation and if such representation is made, the same shall be considered and disposed of within a period of two weeks thereafter.
The writ petition stands ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE Sd/-
JUDGE dn/-
CT-HR