- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1248-DB WP No. 100445 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR WRIT PETITION NO.100445 OF 2025 (S-KAT) BETWEEN: SMT. SHANTAVVA RUDRAGOUDAR MARIGOUDAR, W/O. BASALINGAPPA HUNASYAL, AGE. 48 YEARS, TALUKA BACKWARD CLASSES OFFICER (GROUP-B POST), UNDER ORDER OF POSTING TO THE POST OF TALUKA BACKWARD CLASSES WELFARE OFFICER, BELAGAVI TALUK, DIST. BELAGAVI-590001. (AGAIN UNDER ORDER OF MODIFIED POSTING TO THE POST OF TALUKA BACKWARD CLASSES WELFARE OFFICER, HONNAVARA TALUK, DIST. UTTARA KANNADA) RESIDING AT: AT POST-BELAVADI, TALUK. BELAGAVI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591104. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MADANGOUDA N. PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA R/BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, BACKWARD CLASSES WELFARE DEPARTMENT, VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001. 2. THE COMMISSIONER, BACKWARD CLASSES WELFARE DEPARTMENT, NO.16/D, 3RD FLOOR, D. DEVARAJ URS BHAVAN, MILLERS TANK BED AREA, Digitally signed by SHAKAMBARI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1248-DB WP No. 100445 of 2025 VASANTH NAGAR, BENGALURU-590052. 3. THE DISTRICT OFFICER/DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF BACKWARD CLASSES WELFARE DEPARTMENT, BELAGAVI DISTRICT, BELAGAVI-590001. 4. SRI. KEMPANNA BHANGI, AGE. MAJOR, HOSTEL WARDEN, D. DEVARAJ URS POST METRIC BOYS HOSTEL KANABARGI-1, BELAGAVI TALUK-590015 DIST. BELAGAVI, WORKING ON ADDITIONAL CHARGE BASIS AS TALUK BACKWARD, CLASSES WELFARE OFFICER, BELAGAVI, AND ALSO HOSTEL WARDEN, POST METRIC BOYS HOSTEL, GANESHPUR, BELAGAVI-591108. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. G.K. HIREGOUDAR, GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3; SRI. ARAVIND D. UPADHYE, ADVOCATE FOR C/R4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO, QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 20.01.2025, PASSED BY HON’BLE KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL BELAGAVI IN APPLICATION NO.10094/2025 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ACCORDINGLY DIRECT THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO ACCEPT THE DUTY REPORT OF PETITIONER AND PERMIT HER TO DISCHARGE THE DUTY TO THE POST OF TALUKA BACKWARD WELFARE OFFICER AT BELAGAVI TALUK PURSUANT TO POSTING ORDER BEARING NO.BCWD- 11021/83/2024 DATED 08-1-2025 PASSED BY 2ND RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-A1, WITH ALL CONSEQUENTIAL BENEFITS IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY & ETC., THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1248-DB WP No. 100445 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD) The petitioner is the applicant in Application No. 10094/2025 on the file of the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal, Belagavi Bench [‘the Tribunal’]. The petitioner is aggrieved by the Tribunal’s order dated 20.01.2025, which reads as under: “The learned Counsel for the applicant submits that after the suspension order was revoked vide order dated 08.01.2025, the applicant was posted to the Taluk Backward Classes Welfare Office at Belagavi. The applicant accordingly on 09.01.2025 requested the 2nd respondent to issue movement order. The 3rd respondent on the same day vide endorsement dated 09.01.2025 sought a clarification from the respondent Nos.1 & 2 on the ground that the 4th respondent has already reported on 06.01.2025 at Taluk Backward Classes Welfare Office, Belagavi, as per the Government order. Things stood thus, the 2nd respondent has passed the impugned order dated 13.01.2025 and posted the applicant to Honnavar. The learned counsel for the applicant - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1248-DB WP No. 100445 of 2025 contended that when the applicant who is a regular holder of the post of Taluk Backward Welfare Officer is posted to the present post, the 4th respondent who is holding the additional charge of the present post has to give way to the applicant, in accordance with Rule 68. The 4th respondent is a Warden and a Group-C cadre employee holding two lower cadre post to that of the applicant and he cannot hold the post of Taluk Backward Class Officer at the present place. Hence, he sought for granting an interim order of stay of the impugned order. As the 4th respondent is already holding the post at the present place, the interim order as sought by the learned Counsel for the applicant cannot be granted and the matter has to be heard and disposed finally at the earliest. The learned Counsel on behalf of the 4th respondent has filed vakalath today and undertook to file reply and to argue the matter on the next date of hearing.” 2. Sri. Madangouda N. Patil, the learned counsel for the petitioner, proposes to contend that the Tribunal, in the peculiarities of the case, could not have found that the petitioner cannot be granted the benefit of interim order, and the learned counsel elaborates - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1248-DB WP No. 100445 of 2025 contending that [a] the petitioner’s suspension was revoked and given posting, but he was not permitted to report asking for certain clarification, [b] when the petitioner was before the Tribunal being aggrieved by the Endorsement in that regard, [c] the impugned order dated 13.01.2025 is issued giving additional charge of such post to the fourth respondent, and [d] the fourth respondent, who is holding multiple additional charges though he is in the junior cadre, could not have been given this charge. 3. Sri. Aravind D. Upadhye who appears for the fourth respondent, proposes to refute these contentions asserting inter alia that the fourth respondent does not hold multiple additional charges and that he holds only one additional charge. Sri. G.K. Hiregoudar, the learned Principal Government Advocate who is called upon to accept notice for the other respondents, is heard in the light of these rival submissions and the undisputed fact that the learned counsel for the fourth respondent before the Tribunal has given an undertaking to make his submissions - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1248-DB WP No. 100445 of 2025 for final disposal of the application and that the Tribunal has listed the application on 29.01.2025. 4. This Court must opine that the Tribunal has scheduled the application to hear on merits for final disposal, and therefore, this Court need not to interfere. When queried, the learned counsel for the fourth respondent reiterates the statement that submissions will be made on behalf of the fourth respondent on 29.01.2025 for the disposal of the application. Hence, the petition stands disposed of leaving open all questions to be considered by the Tribunal and requesting the Tribunal to decide the application on 29.01.2025 or within the next ten days. Consequently, the pending applications stand disposed of. Sd/- (B.M.SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE Sd/- (RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR) JUDGE PJ LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 7