- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:13998-DB WP No. 35732 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR WRIT PETITION NO. 35732 OF 2024 (S-KSAT) BETWEEN: SMT. C.K. JAIKIRAN W/O MAHENDRA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS RESIDING AT DOOR NO.212 HOYSALA SPACE NAGAR MAIN ROAD, BEERANAHALLIKERE HASSAN-573 201 …PETITIONER (BY SMT. JYNA KOTHARI, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. NAVEEN CHANDRA V, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT AND DIFFERENTLY ABLED PERSONS AND EMPOWERMENT OF SENIOR CITIZENS DEPARTMENT, M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY 2. THE DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF WOMEN & CHILD DEVELOPMENT M.S.BUILDING, BANGALORE-560 001 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT, HASSAN DISTRICT, HASSAN-571 231 4. SRI. K.G. DILEEP S/O SRI. GANGAIAH AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS Digitally signed by SHAKAMBARI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:13998-DB WP No. 35732 of 2024 WORKING AS DISTRICT WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER HASSAN DISTRICT, HASSAN AND RESIDING AT BEHIND NCC OFFICE NEAR KURUEANA SHETTY KALYANA MANTAPA,RANGOLI HALLA HASSAN-573 201 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B. RAVINDRANATH, AGA FOR R1 TO R3; SRI. GOPALKRISHNA KURANDWAD, ADVOCATE FOR R4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION CALLING FOR THE RECORDS IN APPLICATION NO.4332/2024 FROM THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL AT BANGALORE AND QUASH AND SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 16/12/2024 (ANNEXURE-A) PASSED BY THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL AT BANGALORE IN APPLICATION NO.4332/2024 AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT) The petitioner, a civil servant, is knocking at the doors of Writ Court for assailing the State Administrative Tribunal's order dated 16.12.2024, whereby, private respondent’s Application No.4332/2024 having been - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:13998-DB WP No. 35732 of 2024 favoured, the subject transfer order dated 27.08.2024 has been voided qua the parties thereto. 2. Learned Sr. Advocate Smt.Jayna Kothari appearing for the Petitioner submits that impugned order of the Tribunal is vulnerable for challenge on several grounds; however, now the posting to the contesting private Respondent having been given, much of the resistance from the side of respondents would wither away yielding strength to the case of petitioner for setting aside the impugned order. Smt.Kothari also highlights alleged harassment of her client at the hands of private Respondent and of certain physical disabilities which petitioner and her spouse suffer from. 3. After service of notice, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the State submits that the posting has been given to the private respondent herein vide order dated 27.03.2025 and that he has already reported for duty as well; in view of that this petition can be disposed off. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:13998-DB WP No. 35732 of 2024 4. Learned counsel appearing for the private respondent submits that because of status quo order granted by the Tribunal on 31.08.2024, his client was kept away from service and despite his representation dated 18.12.2024, no posting had been given to him nor salary has been paid for the stay away period, which is unjustifiable. He also tells us that right to wages cannot be denied unless the employee on his own stayed away from work. In reply, learned AGA submits and we broadly agree that ordinarily the principle of ‘No work no pay’ applies in matters like this. However, if private Respondent makes appropriate representation within two weeks explaining the circumstances that kept him away from duty, the same has to be considered on normative basis and result of consideration should be informed to him within three weeks, next following. We observe that broadly speaking, whether posting is given or not, the concerned officer has to report to the higher-up and seek appropriate orders at their hands. That would be an ideal situation. However, we will not say anything beyond this - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:13998-DB WP No. 35732 of 2024 since private respondent's subject representation stares at us. 5. All the above being considered, we are of the view that petitioner needs to be granted relief by setting aside impugned order of the Tribunal so that justice is done to the stakeholders, already posting having been given to the private Respondent, in the fitness of things. No useful purpose will be served by sustaining said order of the Tribunal. In the above circumstances, the petition is allowed and order of Tribunal is set at naught; private Respondent’s Application No. 4332/2024 is dismissed. Costs made easy. Sd/- (KRISHNA S DIXIT) JUDGE Sd/- (RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR) JUDGE AM/Snb