- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:18389-DB WP No. 15260 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF MAY, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T WRIT PETITION NO. 15260 OF 2025 (S-KSAT) BETWEEN: SYEED NOORULLA, S/O LATE KHUDDUS, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, WOKING AS VILLAGE ACCOUNTANT, RESIDING AT BEECHNALLI VILLAGE, ANTHARASANTHE HOBLI, HD KOTE TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT - 571 116. …PETITIONER (BY SRI.MAHESHCHANDRA B. N., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE REGIONAL COMMISSIONER, MYSORE DIVISION, MYSORE - 570 005. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY, MYSORE DISTRICT, MYSORE - 570 011. 3. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, HUNSUR SUB-DIVISION, HUNSUR, MYSORE DISTRICT - 571 105. 4. TAHSILDAR AND ENQUIRY OFFICER, OFFICE OF TAHSILDAR, HUNSUR TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT - 571 105. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.SARITHA KULKARNI, AGA) THIS WP IS FILED PRAYING TO i) ISSUE A WRIT OR SUCH OTHER ORDER OF APPROPRIATE NATURE TO SET ASIDE ORDER DATED 21/05/2025 PASSED BY THE HON’BLE Digitally signed by MOUNESHWARAPPA NAGARATHNA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:18389-DB WP No. 15260 of 2025 KARNATAKA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BENGLAURU IN APPLICATION NO.2281/2025, THEREBY ALLOW THE INTERIM PRAYER OF THE PETITIONER AS SOUGHT FOR IN THE APPLICATION NO.2281/2025 BEFORE THE HON’BLE KARNATAKA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-B. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) Order of dismissal passed by respondent No.2, dismissing the petitioner from service, vide Annexure–A7, is challenged by the petitioner before the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal (for short ‘KSAT’) in application No.2281/2025. The Tribunal vide impugned order has declined to pass an order of stay. Hence, the petitioner has preferred this petition praying to set aside the said order dated 21.05.2025 and to allow the interim prayer sought in the application. 2. It is the contention of the learned counsel for petitioner that, in the proceedings initiated against the petitioner, articles of charge as well as enquiry notice were - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:18389-DB WP No. 15260 of 2025 not served upon him and based on the enquiry, without hearing the petitioner, impugned order dismissing him from service was passed. 3. It is contended by the learned Additional Government Advocate that in fact, notice was issued and served upon the petitioner as it could be seen from the order dated 17.03.2025 at Annexure A7. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on a decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Mohd. Yunus Khan v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others reported in 2010 (10) SCC 539, to contend that a person appearing as a witness, cannot act as an enquiry officer nor he can pass an order of punishment as a disciplinary authority. He contended that in the present case, the enquiry officer has acted as a witness and therefore, the proceedings and the consequent order is vitiated. It is further submitted that as on the date of the order dismissing the petitioner from the service, he was working. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:18389-DB WP No. 15260 of 2025 5. Considering the above facts and circumstances, we are of the view that the Tribunal was not justified in declining the prayer seeking interim order sought by the petitioner. Hence, the following: ORDER i. Petition is allowed. ii. Pending disposal of application No.2281/2025 before the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, Bengaluru, the order bearing No.MYSDC-EST2/CCA(12) 45/2025 E-216115 dated 17.03.2025 passed by the respondent No.2 is stayed. iii. Pending I.A.’s are disposed of. Sd/- (MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE KAV/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 32