- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:17157 WP No. 12333 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 12333 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: SMT.D.ROOPA, IPS W/O SRI. MUNISH MOUDGIL, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, MANAGING DIRECTOR, KSMB, RESHME BHAVAN, OKALIPURAM, BENGALURU – 560 021. …PETITIONER (BY SRI BIPIN HEGDE, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, M.S. BUILDING, DR.AMBEDKAR VEEDI, BENGALURU – 560 001. 2. STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY UNDER SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS (SERVICES-IV) BENGALURU – 560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI MOHAMMED JAFFAR SHAH, AGA SRI K.N.PHANINDRA, SR.ADVOCATE FOR Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:17157 WP No. 12333 of 2025 SRI RAHUL DEV, ADVOCATE FOR IMPLEADING APPLICANT IN I.A.NO.1/25) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A) TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER ORDER, DIRECTION OR APPROPRIATE RELIEF/RELIEF'S TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER DATED 04.12.2024 PRODUCED HERETO AS ANNEXURE-A AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER The petitioner is before this Court seeking a direction to consider the representations dated 04-12-24, 18-12-24, 20-12-24 and 31-12-24. 2. Heard Sri Bipin Hegde, learned counsel appearing for petitioner and the learned Additional Government Advocate Sri Mohammad Jaffar Shah, appearing for respondents. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:17157 WP No. 12333 of 2025 3. Facts, in brief, are as follows: The petitioner is an officer of the Indian Police Service, working in the State of Karnataka, presently holding the post of Managing Director, Karnataka Silk Marketing Board. The petitioner claims to be eligible to be promoted to the rank of Additional Director General of Police. The case of the petitioner is considered by the Departmental Promotion Committee and is placed in a sealed cover. It is the contention of the petitioner that the departmental enquiry pending against her is closed by the Government itself on the ground that the dispute that led to initiation of a departmental enquiry was purely personal and private. On such dropping of the enquiry in terms of Government Order dated 31-12-24, which led to closure of the disciplinary proceedings, her case for promotion on opening the sealed cover requires to be considered, as such she is before this Court. 4. The learned counsel appearing for petitioner Sri Bipin Hegde would submit that three of the representations were submitted prior to the Government Order dated 31-12-24 and one representation is submitted on 31-12-24. The averment in - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:17157 WP No. 12333 of 2025 the petition is that the petitioner is entitled to be considered in terms of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of UNION OF INDIA V. K V JANKIRAMAN reported in (1991)4 SCC 109. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that now, in the light of the closure of the departmental enquiry on 31-12-24, the petitioner be permitted to submit a fresh representation for consideration of promotion of the petitioner. 5. The learned Additional Government Advocate would submit that if reasonable time is granted, representation of the petitioner if submitted, would be considered in accordance with law and necessary orders would be passed. 6. In the light of the aforesaid circumstance, I deem it appropriate to permit the petitioner to submit a representation afresh within 4 weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. The same shall bear consideration, in accordance with law, within 8 weeks from the date of submission of the said representation. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:17157 WP No. 12333 of 2025 7. With the aforesaid directions, the petition stands disposed. The learned senior counsel Sri K N Phanindra, on appearance would submit that, he has filed an impleading application I.A.No.1 of 2025. In the light of the disposal of the petition directing consideration of representation submitted by the petitioner at the hands of the State, consideration of impleading application would not arise, the same is disposed as unnecessary. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE BKP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 58