- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14487-DB WP No. 102933 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S G PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE GEETHA K.B. WRIT PETITION NO. 102933 OF 2022 (S-KAT) BETWEEN: 1. THE REGISTRAR THE KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA, M.S.BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD, BENGALURU-560001. 2. THE ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR OF ENQUIRIES-11 THE KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA, M.S.BUILDING, DR.AMBEDKAR ROAD, BENGALURU-560001. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. ANIL KALE, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. M.D. KANAGALI S/O. DEVANNA KANAGALI AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, OCC. RETIRED, DEPUTY CONSERVATION OF FOREST, SOCIAL FORESTRY DIVISION, DHARWAD, R/O. PLOT NO.2, NEAR DATTA MANDIR, ADHYAPAK NAGAR, HUBBALLI-580032, DIST. DHARWAD. 2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF FOREST, ECOLOGY Digitally signed by BHARATHI H M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.11.04 10:47:22 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14487-DB WP No. 102933 of 2022 AND ENVIRONMENT, VIKAS SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SATHISH K., ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. G.K. HIREGOUDAR, PRL. GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO, ISSUE AN ORDER/DIRECTION/WRIT CALLING FOR RECORDS FROM THE RESPONDENT NO.1 AND THE TRIBUNAL WHICH ULTIMATELY RESULTED IN THE PASSING OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER 17.02.2021 PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BELAGAVI IN APPLICATION NO.10846/2020 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A, ISSUE AN ORDER/DIRECTION/WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR DIRECTION TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER 17.02.2021 PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BELAGAVI IN APPLICATION NO. 10846/2020 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A AND ISSUE AN ORDER/DIRECTION/WRIT DECLARING THAT RULE 214(2)(b)(ii) OF KCSR HAS NO APPLICATION IN RESPECT OF THE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED EITHER ON THE COMPLAINT GIVEN UNDER SEC.9(3) OF THE KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA ACT BY A PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL OR IN RESPECT OF REFERENCE MADE UNDER SEC. 7 (2-A) OF THE KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA ACT BY THE STATE GOVERNMENT AND IN THE ALTERNATIVE ISSUE ON ORDER/ DIRECTION OR ANY APPROPRIATE WRIT DECLARING RULE 214(2)(b)(ii) AND (iii) OF KCSR AS ULTRA-VIRUS BEING CONTRARY TO THE PROVISIONS OF KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA ACT AND ARTICLE 14 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S G PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE GEETHA K.B. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14487-DB WP No. 102933 of 2022 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S G PANDIT) Petitioners-Karnataka Lokayukta authorities are before this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India assailing the legality and correctness of the order dated 17.02.2021 passed by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, Belagavi (for short ‘Tribunal’) in Application No.10846/2020 by which the entrustment order dated 14.05.2019 (Annexure-A3) as well as articles of charge dated 07.08.2020 (Annexure-A4) are quashed. 2. Heard learned counsel Sri.Anil Kale for petitioners, Sri.G.K.Hiregoudar, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.2 and Sri.K.Satish, learned counsel for respondent No.1 through Video Conference. 3. The respondent No.1 was before the Tribunal in the above stated application questioning the order of entrustment of enquiry dated 14.05.2019 and consequent Articles of charge dated 07.08.2020 on the ground that the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14487-DB WP No. 102933 of 2022 Articles of charge is barred by Rule 214 (2)(b)(ii) of KCSR. Accepting the said contention, the Tribunal quashed both, the order of entrustment of enquiry as well as the consequent Articles of charge. 4. On hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the entire writ petition papers, we do not find any illegality or error in the order passed by the Tribunal. 5. Admittedly, the respondent No.1 retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 30.04.2016. Subsequent to retirement, on 07.08.2020, Articles of charges were issued on an incident which had taken place during 2015-2016. Rule 214(2)(b)(ii) reads as follows:- “2(b) The departmental proceedings, if not instituted while the Government servant was in service, whether before his retirement or during his re- employment.- (i) xxxx (ii) shall not be in respect of any event which took place more than four years before such institution; and (iii) xxxx ” - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14487-DB WP No. 102933 of 2022 6. In terms of the above Rule, no enquiry against a retired Government servant could be initiated in respect of an event, which had taken place four years prior to such institution of enquiry. In terms of Rule 214(6), the enquiry is said to be instituted on the date of issuance of Articles of charge. 7. In the instant case, taking note of the date of retirement and date of issuance of Articles of charge, the Articles of charge is hit by Rule 214(2)(b)(ii) of KCSR. 8. We do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the Tribunal. 9. Accordingly, the writ petition stands rejected. Sd/- (S G PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (GEETHA K.B.) JUDGE HMB CT-CMU LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 49