- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:5776-DB WA No. 138 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR N. V. ANJARIA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT APPEAL NO. 138 OF 2025 (S-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. SHAILESH KUMAR S/O SIDHESHWAR SINGH AGE: 54 YEARS FLAT NO.412, E2 BLOCK SMR VINAY ESTELLA SINGAPURA PARADISE LAYOUT MS PALYA, BENGALURU-560 097. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. V. LAKSHMINARAYAN, SR. ADVOCATER FOR SRI. PRITHVEESH M.K., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE UNION OF INDIA MINISTRY OF CHEMICALS AND FERTILIZERS DEPARTMENT OF PHARMACEUTICALS ROOM NO.340B, A-WING 3RD FLOOR, SHASTRI BHAWAN NEW DELHI-110 001. BY THE SECRETARY OF PHARMACEUTICALS. 2. THE KARNATAKA ANTIBIOTICS AND PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. ARKA - THE BUSINESS CENTRE NO. 37, NTTF MAIN ROAD Digitally signed by H K HEMA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:5776-DB WA No. 138 of 2025 2ND PHASE, PEENYA INDUSTRIAL ESTATE BENGALURU - 560 058. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR AND DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY MS. NIRAJA SARAFA AGED MAJOR. 3. THE KARNATAKA ANTIBIOTICS AND PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT ARKA-THE BUSINESS CENTRE, NO. 37 NTTF MAIN ROAD, 2ND PHASE PEENYA INDUSTRIAL ESTATE BENGALURU-560 058. BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER MR. MANJUNATH HEGDE. 4. THE DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING PUBLIC ENTERPRISES SELECTION BOARD, BLOCK NO.14, C.G.O COMPLEX LODHI ROAD, NEW DELHI 110 003. REP. BY THE SECRETARY …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. H.SHANTHI BHUSHAN, DGSI, FOR R1 & R4; SRI. S.N. MURTHY, SR.ADVOCATE A/W SRI. SOMASHEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR C/R-3) THIS WRIT APPEAL FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961 PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS PERTAINING TO THE ORDER DATED 04.12.2024 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WP No-31598/2024 AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 04.12.2024 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WRIT PETITION No.31598/2024 AND CONSEQUENTLY CONTINUE / GRANT THE INTERIM ORDER OF STAY AS PRAYED FOR BY THE APPELLANT BEFORE THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WRIT PETITION No.31598/2024, IN TERMS OF THE ORDER - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:5776-DB WA No. 138 of 2025 DATED 26.11.2024 PASSED IN WRIT PETITION No.31598/2024 TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA) Heard learned Senior Advocate Mr. V. Lakshminarayan assisted by learned advocate Mr. M.K. Prithveesh for the appellant, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India Mr. H.Shanthi Bhushan for respondent Nos.1 and 4 and learned Senior Advocate Mr..S.N..Murthy assisted by learned advocate Mr. Somashekar, for respondent No.3. 2. The present appeal seeks to challenge the order dated 04.12.2024 passed by learned Single Judge in the pending proceedings of Writ Petition No.31598 of 2024, by which the order dated 26.11.2024 was vacated. As per order dated 26.11.2024, the suspension against the petitioner-appellant was stayed. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:5776-DB WA No. 138 of 2025 3. In the writ petition, twin prayers were made. The first was to set aside the show cause notice dated 09.09.2024 issued in respect of certain irregularities alleged against the petitioner and the other challenge was to the order of suspension dated 21.11.2024 which was passed against the petitioner-appellant in contemplation of the disciplinary inquiry. 4. While vacating the stay of suspension granted earlier, learned Single Judge rested his order on the following reason, "27. In light of the contemplated disciplinary proceedings, the order of suspension passed is a decision taken by the employer in its wisdom and cannot be interfered at this stage. The coincidence of invitation of application for the post of Managing Director cannot be a sole ground to stay the order of suspension. The petitioner may have to bear the consequences of the inquiry till he comes clean from the inquiry. It would not be appropriate to stay the order of suspension in light of consequences which the employer may have kept in mind while passing the order of suspension." 5. There are two reasons why the Court is not inclined to interfere with the interim order. Firstly, the aforesaid reasons supplied by learned Single Judge for vacating the stay of suspension could be said to be proper and legal. Secondly, the order by its very nature is an interim order and it is passed at the - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:5776-DB WA No. 138 of 2025 interim stage when the main challenge in the writ petition is pending for consideration on its merits. Rights of any of the parties are not finally crystallized. Even the legality of the suspension order is yet to be finally examined. 5.1 Not only that learned Single Judge has observed to make it clear that, extracting from paragraph 30, 'needless to state that the observations made are only for the purpose of disposing of interlocutory applications and are open for re-consideration when passing of the order on merits'. 5.2 In the aforesaid view, the Court is not inclined to exercise the appellate jurisdiction when the appeal is pending at large before learned Single Judge. 6. In the totality of facts and circumstances, it is open for the parties to request learned Single Judge for expeditious hearing and disposal of the writ petition to which, learned Single Judge will give due regard having regard to his time table. 7. The appeal is disposed of accordingly without expressing anything on the merits of the subject. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:5776-DB WA No. 138 of 2025 In view of dismissal of the appeal, any interlocutory application that may be pending, would not survive and stands accordingly disposed of. Sd/- (N. V. ANJARIA) CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE PGG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19