- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1964 WP No. 100060 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO.100060 OF 2025 (S-DIS) BETWEEN: TALAWAR IRANNA S/O. NARASAPPA, AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: GRAMP SAYAKA, R/O: NITTUR AND YARAKALLU VILLAGE, DIST: BALLARI – 583 212. …PETITIONER (BY SRI S. S. CHALAWADI AND SRI PRAVEEN P. TARIKAR, ADVOCATES) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPT. OF REVENUE, M.S. BUILDING, BANGALURU – 01. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BALLARI, DIST: BALLARI – 583 101. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER & SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, BALLARI, DIST: BALLARI – 583 101. 4. THE TASHILDAR, SHIRAGUPPA, BALLARI DISTRICT – 583 121. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. KIRTILATA R. PATIL, HCGP) 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 AND QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 23-9-2022 PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT BEARING NO. KAM.SIBBANDIDOORU.19. 2021-22 VIDE ANNEXURE-J AND ETC., Digitally signed by VISHAL NINGAPPA PATTIHAL Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1964 WP No. 100060 of 2025 THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THERIEN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA) 1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayer: a) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari and quash the impugned order dated 23.09.2022 passed by the 3rd respondent bearing No. Kam: Sibbandidooru: 19:2021-22 vide Annexure-J b) Grant any other relief/s deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity. 2. Heard Shri S.S. Chalawadi and Shri Praveen P.Tarikar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt. Kirtilata R.Patil, learned counsel appearing for respondents. 3. The petitioner is appointed as a Gram Sevak / Village Assistant on 29.08.1997 and comes to be removed from the services on 28.10.2021 on certain allegations without holding any enquiry. The petitioner is challenging the said order on the score that the removal of the petitioner from services is on account of certain allegations - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1964 WP No. 100060 of 2025 and therefore it is an order that caused stigma upon the petitioner, such orders which casts stigma could not be passed without at the outset holding an enquiry. 4. Learned counsel would place reliance upon the orders passed by Coordinate Bench rendered in identical circumstances. 5. The order of the Coordinate Bench reads as follows: “4. Sri. K.B. Onkara, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that pursuant to the show-cause notice dated 4th June, 2021 (Annexure-B), the petitioner has tendered unconditional apology on 28th July, 2021 (Annexure-E). The respondent No.3, accepting the same has exonerated the petitioner, however, removed the petitioner on the very same ground as per the impugned order, which requires to be interfered with in this writ petition. He also referred to the incident said to have happened on 12th May, 2021 and in this regard he argued that, no notice has been issued to the petitioner. Accordingly, he sought for interference of this Court. 5. Sri. M.S. Nagaraja, learned Additional Government appearing for respondents 1 to 3 submits that the petitioner was not discharging his duties as Gram Sahayak and at his instance, the higher officer has been embarrassed, and accordingly, the impugned order has been passed, and as appointment of Gram Sahayak is temporary post and therefore, he sought to justify the impugned order passed by the respondent No.3. 6. Sri. Harish Kumar M.C., learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4 submits that pursuant to the removal of the petitioner, the respondent No.3 has - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1964 WP No. 100060 of 2025 issued Notification dated 17th August, 2021 (Annexure-G) and appointed the respondent No.4 herein as Gram Sahayak. Therefore, he submits that the post held by the respondent No.4 has to be protected in the event, if the petition is to be allowed. 7. In the light of submission made by learned counsel appearing for the parties, on careful examination of the impugned order dated 6th August, 2021 (Annexure-F) would indicate that the respondent No.3 has removed the petitioner from the post of Gram Sahayak referring to the two incidents said to have been happened on 5th May, 2021 and 12th May, 2021. Insofar as incident said to have happened on 5th May, 2021, the respondent No.3 has issued show-cause notices dated 4th June, 2021 (Annexure-B) and 14th July, 2021 (Annexure-D), for which the petitioner has replied and tendered unconditional apology and same was accepted and warned the petitioner as stated in the paragraph 3 of the impugned order. However, no notice has been issued to the petitioner insofar as the incident said to have been happened on 12th May, 2021, and respondent No.3 has issued impugned order without calling for explanation from the petitioner. In that view of the matter, removal of the petitioner with the allegation made in the impugned order amounts to be stigmatic. Though the petitioner has been appointed on temporary basis, the petitioner ought to have been heard in the matter before issuing the order dated 6th August, 2021 (Annexure-F). 8. In that view of the matter, order dated 6th August, 2021 (Annexure-F) issued by the respondent No.3 is set aside and respondent No.3 is directed to take action against the petitioner if so advised, after affording an opportunity to the petitioner. Having set aside the order dated 6th August, 2021 (Annexure-F), the respondent No.3 is directed to reinstate the petitioner into service. However, taking into consideration the fact that respondent: No.4 has been appointed pursuant to the Notification dated 17th August, 2021 (Annexure-G), the respondent No.3 shall take necessary steps to appoint respondent No.4 in a place according to their discretion in a vacant place. With these observations, writ petition stands disposed of.” - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1964 WP No. 100060 of 2025 6. Therefore, the issue standing answered, I deem it appropriate to follow suit by granting the same relief. 7. For the aforesaid reasons, the following: ORDER (i) The Writ Petition is disposed. (ii) The order dated 23.09.2022 passed by the respondent No.3 is set aside and respondent No.3 is directed to take action against the petitioner if so advised, after affording an opportunity to the petitioner. Having set aside the order dated 23.09.2022, the respondent No.3 is directed to reinstate the petitioner into service. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE VNP & Naa /CT-ASC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25