- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:6097-DB WA No. 1816 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR N. V. ANJARIA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT APPEAL NO. 1816 OF 2024 (S-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI BASAVARAJ. I S/O. LATE HALAPPA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS EARLIER WORKING AS MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER HARIHARA MUNICIPAL COUNCIL PERMANENT RESIDENT OF CHATNAHALLI VILALGE HARAPANAHALLI TALUK VIJAYANAGAR DISTRICT - 577 538. …APPELLANT (BY SRI SATISH K., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR DIRECTORATE OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION 9TH AND 10TH FLOOR VISHWESHWARAIAH TOWER DR. B. R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU - 560 002. 2. KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTHA POLICE DAVANAGERE DISTRICT DAVANAGERE - 577 002. Digitally signed by AMBIKA H B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:6097-DB WA No. 1816 of 2024 (VCO DATED 09.01.2025 RESPONDENT NO.2 IS DELETED). …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI K.S. HARISH, GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT APPEAL FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS PERTAINING TO THE WRIT PETITION No. 26749/2024 & SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 30.09.2024 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WRIT PETITION No. 26749/2024 FILED BY THE APPELLANT AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE WRIT PETITION No. 26749/2024 AS SOUGHT FOR BY THE APPELLANT & ETC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA) The dispute and the controversy involved in the present appeal was reflected in the following observations made by the Court in the order dated 21.01.2025 while admitting the appeal, "2. This writ appeal is directed against the judgment and order of learned Single Judge dated 30.09.2024, whereby the writ petition of the appellant-petitioner came to be dismissed. 3. What was challenged in the petition was the order dated 30.08.2024 passed by respondent No.1-Directorate of Municipal Administration suspending the petitioner. The suspension was ordered in view of the fact that the - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:6097-DB WA No. 1816 of 2024 petitioner was facing the prosecution in the case registered as Crime No.5/2024. Learned Single Judge took view that the petitioner was caught and the said case was filed and that since the petitioner was arrested and was released 30 days thereafter, the deemed suspension provision contained in Rule 10(2)A of the Karnataka Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957 (for short 'Rules, 1957), the suspension was justified. Accordingly, the petition was dismissed. 4. When the appeal came up for consideration today, learned Senior Advocate for the appellant submitted that the proceedings of case in Crime No.5/2024 was subject matter of the writ petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and that the Court has restrained the authorities from filing the final report. This factum could not be disputed by the learned Government Advocate. 4.1. In light of the above stay granted in the criminal proceedings, it was urged by the learned Senior Advocate for the appellant that Rule 10 (3) of the aforesaid Rules, 1957 contemplates that if the suspension of the Government servant has continued for a period of six months and more and that no Disciplinary Enquiry is instituted, the suspension shall stand automatically revoked. It was the contention that in view of this provision, it was incumbent on the part of the Authorities to treat the suspension as revoked. 4.2. Responding to this submission, learned Government Advocate submitted that the Competent Authority is ready to consider the said aspect, inasmuch as, the representation in that regard is already submitted." 2. One of the directions contained in paragraph 5 of the aforesaid order was that in the meantime, the competent authority shall decide the representation within stipulated time and the decision shall be communicated to the petitioner. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:6097-DB WA No. 1816 of 2024 3. Today, when the appeal came up for consideration, learned Government Advocate Mr. K.S. Harish stated that the representation of the petitioner is decided and since six months have expired, the decision is taken to revoke the suspension of the petitioner subject to outcome of the inquiry. The order dated 11.02.2025 revoking the suspension is produced. 4. There is no dispute about the factum of passing of the revocation order, as aforesaid. The copy of the order is taken on record. 5. In the aforesaid view, the appeal does not survive. It is accordingly disposed of. In view of disposal of the appeal, any interlocutory application that may be pending, would not survive and stands accordingly disposed of. Sd/- (N. V. ANJARIA) CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE CR, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 86