SRI. K. M. PURUSHOTHAM v. ARAVIND - 3 - NC: -DB WP No. 27652 of 2025 HC-KAR

1. SRI. K. M. PURUSHOTHAM S/O. MARIGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, WORKING AS EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, MANDYA DIVISION, MANDYA-571 401. (BY SRI. VIJAYA KUMAR., ADVOCATE) AND: …PETITIONER

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001.

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND PANCHAYAT RAJ, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, MARIMUTHU Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:36181-DB WP No. 27652 of 2025 HC-KAR VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001.

SRI. HARSHA. H. R. S/O. RAMALINGAIAH. H. S., AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, WORKING AS EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PWD DIVISION, (UNDER ORDERS OF TRANSFER) MANDYA-571 401. (BY SRI. V. SHIVAREDDY, AGA FOR R1 & 2; SRI. D.R.RAVISHANKAR, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI. M.K.PRITHVEESH, ADVOCATE FOR C/R3) …RESPONDENTS THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 08/09/2025 PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN APPLICATION NO.4067/2025 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ALLOW THE APPLICATION AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, `HIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:36181-DB WP No. 27652 of 2025 HC-KAR ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT) Heard Sri. Vijaya Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and Sri. D.R.Ravishankar, learned Senior counsel for Sri. M.K.Prithveesh, learned counsel for respondent No.3.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner belongs to the department of Rural Development and Panchayat Raj and was deputed to PWD under Notification dated 09.07.2025. In pursuance of the said Notification, the petitioner was posted to work as Executive Engineer, PWD Division, Mandya, under order dated 30.08.2025 in the place of respondent No.3. Respondent No.3 aggrieved by the order dated

30.08.2025, posting the petitioner in his place without providing any posting to him approached the Tribunal in Application No.4067/2025. Respondent No.3 also sought interim relief to stay the said order dated 30.08.2025. The - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:36181-DB WP No. 27652 of 2025 HC-KAR Tribunal, under the impugned order dated 08.09.2025 by recording reasons, stayed the order dated 30.08.2025 posting the petitioner as Executive Engineer, PWD Division, Mandya.

3. Learned counsel would mainly submit that the Respondent No.3 was kept under suspension and the said suspension was the subject matter of the Application No.1559/2024 and subsequently, the subject matter of the Writ Petition No.15080/2024, whereunder this Court directed reinstatement of the Respondent No.3 subject to further orders.

Sri. Vijaya Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that taking note of the said interim order, the Tribunal proceeded to grant stay of the order dated 30.08.2025. It is contended that the Respondent No.3 has completed his tenure of two years at PWD Division, Mandya on 03.02.2023 and respondent No.3 has no right to continue in the said post. Therefore, - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:36181-DB WP No. 27652 of 2025 HC-KAR learned counsel Sri. Vijaya Kumar would submit that the Tribunal has committed an error in granting stay of the order dated 30.08.2025, apart from urging other grounds.

On the other hand, learned Senior Counsel for caveator would submit that the Tribunal at paragraph 3 recorded its reasons for granting interim order and he would further submit that the stay granted by this Court is one of the grounds to grant stay. Further, it is submitted that the application is posted to 22.09.2025 and the parties could argue the application on the said date.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the entire writ petition papers, we decline to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Tribunal.

The Tribunal, while passing the interim order has taken note of the interim stay granted to respondent No.3 in Writ Petition No.15080/2024, but it is not the sole ground on which the interim order is granted. However, - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:36181-DB WP No. 27652 of 2025 HC-KAR the impugned order of the Tribunal would only grant stay of impugned notification dated 30.08.2025, but it would not continue respondent No.3 at Mandya. Whether respondent No.3 has completed his tenure; whether he is regular holder of the post and whether the posting of the petitioner in place of respondent No.3 is justified or not, are to be decided by the Tribunal in the pending application. We do not find any ground to interfere with interim order. Hence, the writ petition stands dismissed. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE GJM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11