- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19744-DB WP No. 10812 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T.M.NADAF WRIT PETITION NO. 10812 OF 2023 (S-KSAT) BETWEEN: KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA M S BUILDING, BENGALURU – 560 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MALLIKARJUN REDDY K S, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI SUNIL KUMAR S/O SHEKHAR ACHARYA, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, ASSISTANT ENGINEER, O/O ASST. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KBJNL IBC, SUB-DIVISION NO.5, ALMEL, SINDGI TALUK, VIJAYAPURA DISTRICT – 586 202. 2. R G RATHOD AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, S/O GOPU, ASST. EXEUCTIVE ENGINEER, O/O ASST. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KBJNL IBC, SUB-DIVISION NO.5, ALMEL, SINDGI TALUK, VIJAYAPURA DISTRICT-586202. Digitally signed by MADHUSHREE H Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19744-DB WP No. 10812 of 2023 R/A H.NO.66, SUBHAVASTU COLONY, ASHRAM ROAD, VIJAYAPURA – 586 203. 3. S B PATRI AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, S/O BASALINGAYYA, EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (RETD), R/A VIJETA NAGARA, DARGA ROAD, VIJAYAPURA – 568 203. 4. SHRI V. N. HADIMANI AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, S/O NINGAPPA EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (RETD), R/A NO.27, DEVI COLONY, GOKAL ROAD, HUBLI – 580 030. 5. SRI GANGANNA NINGAPPA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, S/O NINGAPPA, ACCOUNT SUPERINTENDENT O/O ASST. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER KBJNL CANAL ZONE-2 KEMBAVI, SINDGI TALUK, VIJAYAPURA DISTRICT – 586 202. 6. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY PUBLIC WORKS, PORTS AND INLAND WATER, RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, M S BUILDING, BENGALURU – 560 001. 7. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, M S BUILDING, BENGALURU – 560 001. …RESPONDENTS - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19744-DB WP No. 10812 of 2023 (BY SRI. K MANJUNATH RAO BHOUNSLE, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. V SHIVA REDDY, AGA FOR R6 & R7; SRI. B.J.ROHIT GOWDA AND SRI. MANJUNATH GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R5; R2 & R4 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO a) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF A WRIT THEREBY QUASHING THE COMMON ORDER DATED 22/02/2022 PASSED BY THE HON BLE KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL AT BENGALURU IN APPLICATION NO.596-600/2020, AS PER ANNEXURE-A; b) AWARD THE COST OF THIS WRIT PETITION, ETC THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T.M.NADAF ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT) The petitioner – Karnataka Lokayukta is before this Court under Article–226 of the Constitution of India, aggrieved by the order dated 22.02.2022, in Application Nos.596-600/2020, where under the matter is remanded to the Disciplinary Authority to consider the matter afresh, by applying mind to the material including the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19744-DB WP No. 10812 of 2023 investigation report and report under Section-12(3) of Karnataka Lokayukta Act, and to take a decision in accordance with law. 2. Heard learned counsel Sri.Mallikarjun Reddy K.S., for the petitioner, Sri.K.Manjunatha Rao Bhonsle, learned counsel for respondent No.1, Sri.V.Shiva Reddy, learned AGA for respondent Nos.6 and 7 and also Sri.B.J.Rohit Gowda and Manjunath Gowda, learned counsel for respondent No.5 and perused the writ petition papers. 3. Respondent Nos.1 to 5 approached the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal (for short ‘Tribunal’) in the above stated applications questioning the Government Order dated 13.02.2019 (Annexure-6), where under the enquiry against respondent Nos.1 to 5 was entrusted to Karnataka Lokayukta under Rule-14-A of the Karnataka Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules 1957 (for short ‘Rules 1957’). - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19744-DB WP No. 10812 of 2023 4. The Tribunal on hearing the parties to the application allowed the application, quashed the impugned order of entrustment dated 13.02.2019, remitting the matter to the Disciplinary Authority to consider the matter afresh by applying its independent mind to the investigation report, as well as report under Section-12(3) of Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984 report and to take a decision in accordance with law. 5. Admittedly, the Disciplinary Authority – State Government has not come before this Court and has accepted the impugned order. 6. When the Disciplinary Authority - State Government is not aggrieved by the impugned order and accepted the impugned order of the Tribunal, the petitioner who is only an Enquiring Authority has no locus to challenge the order of remand. It is for the State Government to examine the material, as well as Section- 12(3) report. Section-12(4) of Karnataka Lokayukta Act, - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19744-DB WP No. 10812 of 2023 1984 requires the Competent Authority to examine the report forwarded to it under Section-12(3) of Act, 1984. 7. This Court in an identical facts and circumstances in Writ Petition No.2981/2023 and connected matters, dated 15.04.2025, has come to the conclusion that when the matter is remitted back to the Disciplinary Authority for fresh consideration retaining the report under Section-12(3) of Act 1984, the Enquiring Authority i.e., Lokayukta does not have sufficient locus. 8. In the above facts and circumstances, we are of the considered view that there is no merit in the writ petition and accordingly, the writ petition stands rejected. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE JJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9