- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:954 WP No. 100978 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 100978 OF 2023 (S-DIS) BETWEEN: KHAJAHUSSAI KHAJI S/O MOHAMMAD MOOSA KHAJI, AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: JUNIOR ENGINEER, R/O. ARVIND NAGAR, WARD NO.20, HOSPETE- 583225. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SADIQ.N.GOODWALA AND SMT. SEEMA S. NAIK, ADVOCATES) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY UNDER SECRETARY, URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU- 01. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, VIJAYANAGAR DISTRICT, HOSPETE -583201. 3. THE COMMISSIONER, CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, HOSPETE- 583201. 4. THE DIRECTOR, MUNICIPAL ADMINSITRATION, VISHVESHWARIA TOWER, SAMPANGI RAMA NAGAR, BENGALURU -560000. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.KIRTHILATHA.R.PATIL, HCGP FOR R1, R2 AND R4, SRI. SHIVARAJ.S.BALLOLI, ADVOCATE FOR R3) Digitally signed by VISHAL NINGAPPA PATTIHAL Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:954 WP No. 100978 of 2023 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA IS PRAYING TO I) CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS PERTAINING TO THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 10.02.2023 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO. 1 AT ANNEXURE-E AND ANNEXURE-F DATED 06.02.2023 IN SUM.KUM.AASHA/SIBANDHI/27/2022-23 AND ANNEXURE-G DATED 10.02.2023 IN NO. SUM.KUM.AASHA/SIBANDI/27/2022-23 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.2. II) A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 10.02.2023 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 AT ANNEXURE-E, ANNEXURE-F DATED 06.02.2023 IN NO. SUM.KUM.AASHA/SIBANDHI/27/2022-23 AND ANNEXURE-G DATED 10.02.2023 IN NO. SUM.KUM. AASHA/ SIBANDI/27/2022-23 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.2. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA) 1. The petitioner is before this court seeking the following prayer: (i) Call for the entire records pertaining to the impugned order dated. 10.02.2023 issued by the Respondent No.1 at Annexure-E, Annexure- F dated:06.02.2023 in No.SUM.KUM.AASHA/SIBANDHI/ 27/2022-23 and Annexure-G dated:10.02.2023 in No.SUM.KUM.AASHA/SIBANDHI/27/2022-23 issued by Respondent No2. (ii) A Writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 10.02.2023 issued by the Respondent No.1 at Annexure-E, Annexure-F dated: 06.02.2023 in No.SUM.KUM.AASHA/SIBANDHI/27/2022-23 and Annexure-G dated: 10.02.2023 in No.SUM.KUM.AASHA/SIBANDHI/27-2022-23 issued by Respondent No.2. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:954 WP No. 100978 of 2023 (iii) A writ in nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to re-instate the petitioner herein. (iv) Issue such other reliefs as this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the circumstances of the case. 2. The petitioner is an employee of respondent No.3-Hospet City Municipal Council. Certain allegations sprung made against the petitioner, about his way of functioning. It appeared in the local newspapers that there was public furore and therefore the decision was taken to keep the petitioner under suspension. Except the newspaper reports there is nothing that was against the petitioner is an admitted fact. As the learned counsel Shri.Shivaraj Balloli representing the respondent No.3 would admit that except the newspaper reports there was no other material against the petitioner. 3. This court in Writ Petition No.11039/2018 (S-RES) C/w Writ Petition No.11038/2018 (S-Res) disposed off on 14.10.2020 in an identical circumstance ofan employee being placed under suspension based on newspaper reports has held as follows:- - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:954 WP No. 100978 of 2023 “7. The Impugned order of suspension is passed invoking Rule 10 of the said Rule. Sub-rule (3) of Rule 10 reads as follows: "10. Suspension (1) The Appointing Authority or any authority to which it is subordinate or any other authority empowered by the Government in this behalf may place a Government Servant under suspension.- (2) xx xx xx (3) The authority competent to place a Government servant under suspension shall examine the relevant material relating to the case and consider whether there is prima facie evidence to support the charges made against the Government servant and it is satisfied on such examination that prima facie evidence exists, it may place the Government servant concerned under suspension." 8. In terms of the afore-extracted Rule, the Competent Authority to place a Government servant under suspension shall examine the relevant material relating to the case and consider whether there is prima facie evidence to support the charges made against the Government servant and be satisfied with such examination and then place the Government servant under suspension. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:954 WP No. 100978 of 2023 9. In the case at hand, the impugned order does not indicate that there is examination of any material except the newspaper reports. Hence, the order of suspension would be in violation of the afore-quoted Rule which empowers the Competent Authority to place Government servant under suspension. 10. Hence, on this short ground that there is not even a minimum application of mind by the Competent Authority while placing the petitioners under suspension, which becomes contrary to the mandate of the Rule afore-extracted, the order of suspension will have to be set aside. 11. The respondents have filed statement of objections contending that the petitioners had to be immediately placed under suspension so that they would not interfere with the conduct of enquiry or tamper with documentary or oral evidence. It is further contended that the explanation offered by the petitioners was examined and on being satisfied that the explanation offered was not acceptable, the Competent Authority has placed the petitioners under suspension.” 4. In the light of the issue standing answered as quoted hereinabove the petition deserves to succeed. 5. For the aforesaid reason, the following: ORDER (a) The petition is allowed. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:954 WP No. 100978 of 2023 (b) The impugned order dated:10.02.2023 issued by the Respondent No.1 at Annexure-E, Annxure-F dated: 06.02.2023 in No.SUM.KUM.AASHA/SIBANDHI/27/ 2022-23 and Annexure-G dated:10.02.2023 in No.SUM.KUM.AASHA/SIBANDHI/27/2022-23 issued by Respondent No.2 are stands quashed. (c) The petitioner becomes entitled to all consequential benefits that would flow from the quashment of the order of suspension. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE RHR/-CT-GTB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7