- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:18378-DB WA No. 787 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 APPEAL NO. 787 OF 2025 (S-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SATHISH KUMAR S.T. S/O LAKSHMAMMA THIMMAIAH AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS PERMANENT RESIDENT OF 'SHRIYASAMA', CH NO.54, 6TH CROSS K.R.VANAM, MYSURU-8 WORKING AS POSTMASTER HSG-I UNDER SUSPENSION HEAD POST OFFICE NANJANAGUDU-571301 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. CHETHANA S.J., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. UNION OF INDIA REP BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF POSTS MINISTRY OF COMMUNICATION AND IT DAKBHAWAN, SANSAD MARG NEW DELHI-110001 Digitally signed by MOUNESHWARAPPA NAGARATHNA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:18378-DB WA No. 787 of 2025 2. THE CHIEF POSTMASTER GENERAL KARNATAKA CIRCLE, PALACE ROAD BENGALURU-560001 3. THE POSTMASTER GENERAL SOUTH KARNATAKA REGION 2ND FLOOR, GPO BUILDING BENGALURU-01 4. THE SUPDT OF POST OFFICES NANJANAGUDU DIVISION NANJANAGUDU-571301 5. TARA. V W/O GANGAHANUMAIAH AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS WORKING AS DIRECTOR POSTAL SERVICES HEAD QUARTERS O/O THE CHIEF POSTMASTER GENERAL KARNATAKA CIRCLE BENGALURU-560001 6. RAJENDRA KUMAR S S/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS WORKING AS CHIEF POSTMASTER GENERAL KARNATAKA CIRCLE BENGALURU-01 7. CHANDRASHEKAR KAKUMANU S/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS WORKING AS POSTMASTER GENERAL - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:18378-DB WA No. 787 of 2025 SOUTH KARNATAKA REGION GPO BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001 8. GOVINDARAJU N AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS S/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER WORKING AS SUPERINTENDENT OF POST OFFICES NANJANAGUDU-571301 9. LAKSHMIKANTH DASH S/O P.K.DASH AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS THE DDG, DAK BHAWAN, SANSAD MARG NEW DELHI-01 10. JAYARAMASHETTY AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS S/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER WORKING AS SUPDT OF POST OFFICES SHIVAMOGGA DIVISION-577201 11. RAVEENDRA NAIKA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS S/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER WORKING AS SRM, RMS Q DIVISION MANGALURU-01 12. SHRIKANTAIAH A T AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS S/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER WORKING AS - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:18378-DB WA No. 787 of 2025 ASSISTANT SUPDT OF POST OFFICES O/O POSTMASTER GENERAL, SOUTH KARNATAKA REGION GPO BUILDING BENGALURU-560001 13. SMT SWATHI W/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS WORKING AS INSPECTOR POSTS O/O POSTMASTER GENERAL, SK REGION BENGALURU-560001 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B. PRAMOD, CGC FOR R1 TO R4; V/O DTD.27.05.2025, NOTICE TO R5 TO R13 ARE D/W) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO i) ALLOW THE WRIT APPEAL FILED BY THE APPELLANT BY SETTING ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 09/04/2025 PASSED IN WP NO.10215/2025 BY THE HONBLE SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HONBLE COURT AND ETC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:18378-DB WA No. 787 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) This appeal is directed against the order dated 09.04.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. No.10215/2025. 2. We have heard the learned counsel for appellant and learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 4. 3. Order bearing No.SP/CONFIDENTIAL/DLGS/ 2025 dated 28.03.2025, suspending the appellant from service, was challenged before the learned Single Judge, seeking a direction to the respondents to continue him at the same place from where he was relieved in completion of his tenure and further to initiate disciplinary proceedings against respondent No.5 to 13 therein etc. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:18378-DB WA No. 787 of 2025 4. The learned Single Judge noticing that the appellant herein is an employee of the Postal Department and therefore, any dispute regarding his service had to be agitated before the Central Administrative Tribunal as provided under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 ('the Act' for short) and opining that an alternative remedy is available, dismissed the writ petition, reserving liberty to the petitioner to approach the Central Administrative Tribunal in accordance with law. 5. It is not in dispute that the appellant is an employee of the Postal Department and therefore, dispute regarding his service can be agitated before the Central Administrative Tribunal as provided under Section 19 of the Act. 6. The contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the impugned order of suspension dated 28.03.2025 is an order passed without jurisdiction - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:18378-DB WA No. 787 of 2025 and therefore, there is no bar to entertain the writ petition even if there is availability of an alternative remedy. 7. The learned Single Judge has taken note of the contention raised by the respondent that the suspension was neither punishment nor does it affect the service condition of the petitioner and therefore, the order was under the authority of law. 8. It is also brought to the notice of the Court by the learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 4 that after disposal of the writ petition on 09.04.2025, the appellant has preferred an appeal under Rule 23(i) of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 before the Appellate Authority and Postmaster General, S.K. Region, Bengaluru. 9. In view of the above, keeping open all the contentions of the appellant to be raised before the appropriate forum, the writ appeal is dismissed. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:18378-DB WA No. 787 of 2025 Pending I.As are disposed of. Sd/- (MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE SJK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16