- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33113 WP No. 15723 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 15723 OF 2021 (S-RES) BETWEEN: M. KUMARA S/O. LATE T. MARIGOWDA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS OCCUPATION BILL COLLECTOR NO.1054/4, LENIN NAGAR NEAR SIDDAGANGA SCHOOL ROAD DAVANAGERE-577 002 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. DIVYATEJ H N., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560 001. 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001. 3. THE REGISTRAR KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA M.S. BUILDING DR. B. R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE-560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B J ESWARAPPA, AGA FOR R1 & R2: SRI. VENKATESH S ARABATTI, ADVOCATE FOR R3) Digitally signed by HEMALATHA A Location: HIGH COURTOF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33113 WP No. 15723 of 2021 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO THE ORDER NO. G.O.NAE 48 ACB/2014 DATED:23.3.2021 PASSED BY THE R-2 AT ANNEXURE-A AGAINST THE PETITIONER MAY PLEASE BE SET ASIDE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND ECT. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD ORAL ORDER 1. In this writ petition, the petitioner has called in question: (a) the order dated 23.03.2021 passed by respondent No.2 vide Annexure-A, whereby penalty of compulsory retirement has been imposed on the petitioner and (b) the order dated 22.01.2015 passed by respondent No.1 vide Annexure-A1 whereby respondent No.2 by exercising the power under Rule 14A of the Karnataka Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957 (for short ‘the Rules’), has entrusted the matter to Lokayukta. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33113 WP No. 15723 of 2021 2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner was working as a Bill Collector at Municipal Corporation, Davanagere. On the basis of a complaint lodged by the complainant, the Lokayukta registered a case and conducted trap and the petitioner was trapped. After investigation, the Lokayukta filed charge sheet against the petitioner in Special Case No.3/2014. During the pendency of the said case, the respondents initiated departmental enquiry. On the request made by the Lokayukta, the respondent No.2 by order dated 22.01.2015 vide Annexure-A1, by exercising the power under Rule 14A of the Rules has entrusted the matter to Lokayukta to conduct enquiry and submit a report. Accordingly, the Lokayukta has submitted a report and recommendations on 05.09.2016 vide Annexure-B. On the basis of the said report, respondent No.2 has passed the impugned order dated 23.03.2021 at Annexure-A and imposed penalty. Being aggrieved by the orders passed at Annexure-A and Annexure-A1, the petitioner is before this Court. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33113 WP No. 15723 of 2021 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is a Group-C employee. As per the C & R Rules of the Karnataka Municipalities (Recruitment of Officers and Employees) Rules, 2010, ‘the Director of Municipal Administration’ is the competent authority to impose penalty and the State Government is the Appellate authority. The impugned order dated 23.03.2021 at Annexure-A is passed by the respondent No.2, State Government and the same is without jurisdiction. Secondly, he has contended that the entrustment order passed by the respondent No.2 vide Annexure-A1 entrusting the matter to Lokayukta to conduct enquiry and submit report, is without authority of law. Hence, he sought for allowing the writ petition. 4. The learned counsel for the respondent No.3- Lokayukta submits that the entrustment order at Annexure-A1 has been issued on 22.01.2015 and that order has not been challenged by the petitioner immediately. After lapse of more than 6 years, the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33113 WP No. 15723 of 2021 entrustment order has been challenged in this writ petition. There is delay in challenging the said order. Hence, he sought for dismissal of the writ petition. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the writ papers. 6. In respect of impugned order at Annexure-A dated 23.03.2021 passed by respondent No.2, the same is passed without jurisdiction. The respondent No.2 is not the competent authority to pass the order at Annexure-A and impose penalty on the petitioner. Only on this short ground alone, the order dated 23.03.2021 at Annexure-A, is liable to be quashed. 7. However, the contentions of the parties regarding delay, acquiescence and competency of issuing Annexure- A1, can be kept open. 8. Further, since the petitioner has been dismissed from service on 23.03.2021 and since it is already 4 years now, - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33113 WP No. 15723 of 2021 in the facts and circumstances of the case, respondents cannot be directed to reinstate the petitioner into service. However, the Director of Municipal Administration can be directed to pass orders on enquiry report submitted by the Lokayukta, as expeditiously as possible. 9. Accordingly, the following order is passed: ORDER a) The writ petition is allowed-in-part. b) The order dated 23.03.2021 passed by respondent No.2 vide Annexure-A is hereby quashed. The Director of Municipal Administration is directed to reconsider the matter in accordance with law. c) All the contentions of the parties in respect of Annexure-A1 dated 22.01.2015 passed by respondent No.2, is kept open. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33113 WP No. 15723 of 2021 d) The Director of Municipal Administration is directed to pass orders on enquiry report submitted by the Enquiry Officer and recommendations of the Lokayukta, as expeditiously as possible, not later than two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Sd/- (H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE DM LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 26