- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52024 WP No. 32634 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI WRIT PETITION NO. 32634 OF 2025 (S-RES) BETWEEN: SRI.R. RAGHAVENDRA S/O RAMKRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS R/AT No.26, 2ND CROSS RAMALINGESHWARA BADAVANE BY PASS ROAD HIREBIDANURU VILLAGE GOWRIBIDANURU - 561 208. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RANGANATH REDDY R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY ENERGY DEPARTMENT OF KARNATAKA, ROOM NO. 236, 2ND FLOOR, VIKAS SOUDHA, Digitally signed by SUNITHA K S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52024 WP No. 32634 of 2025 DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR STREET, BENGALURU - 560001 2. MANAGING DIRECTOR OF BESCOM, BESCOM CORPORATE OFFICE, K.R. CIRCLE, BENGALURU-560001 3. GENERAL MANAGER (ADMINISTRATION AND HR) APPOINTING AUTHORITY, CORPORATE OFFICE, K.R. CIRCLE, BENGALURU-560001. 4. SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER (E), BESCOM, KOLAR CIRCLE OFFICE, KOLAR - 563101 5. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (E), BESCOM, CHIKKABALLAPURA DIVISION, BESCOM, NEAR OLD EMPLOYMENT OFFICE, VIVEKANANDA ROAD, TUMKUR -572101. 6. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, BESCOM, GUDIBANDE SUB DIVISION, CHIKKABALLAPURA-561209. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.J. ESHWARAPPA, AGA FOR R1 SRI. LIKITH R PRAKASH, ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R6) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52024 WP No. 32634 of 2025 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH SUSPENSION ORDER DTD. 12.09.2025 BEARING NUMBER BESCOM/BC44/E-15/2025-26 PASSED BY THE R-3 VIDE ANNX-G ISSUED BY R-3. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner filed this writ petition seeking for the following prayers: i. To issue writ of certiorari to quash suspension order dated 12.09.2025 bearing No.BESCOM/BC44/E-15/2025-26 passed by respondent No.3 vide Annexure-G issued by respondent No.3. 2. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this writ petition are as follows: 3. The petitioner is an employee of BESCOM. A show cause notice dated 26.06.2025 was issued by - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52024 WP No. 32634 of 2025 respondent No.5, based on the complaint of one Gangadharappa alleging that the petitioner has derelicted from his duty by not replacing the electric pole which had been damaged due to heavy rain and winds. Hence, respondent No.5 issued a show-cause notice on 26.06.2025 seeking the petitioner's reply. The petitioner has submitted his reply. One more show cause notice was issued on 21.07.2025 by respondent No.5. The petitioner replied to the said show cause notice on 01.08.2025. The appointing authority passed the order of suspension. The petitioner aggrieved by the order of suspension, filed this writ petition. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the appointing authority while passing an order of suspension, has not assigned any reasons. The order of suspension issued by the respondents is without - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52024 WP No. 32634 of 2025 application of mind. Hence, on this ground, prays to allow the writ petition. 6. Perused the records and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. 7. It is an undisputed fact that the petitioner is working in BESCOM and complaint was received by the authority against the petitioner. The respondents have issued a show cause notice to the petitioner. Though the petitioner has replied to the show cause notice, the respondents being dissatisfied with the reply submitted by the petitioner has passed an order of suspension. The order of suspension is not a punishment. The petitioner is getting subsistence allowances. The order of suspension can be challenged only on two grounds, that 1) the petitioner should establish the order of suspension is with a mala fide intention, 2) The order of suspension was not passed by an appointing authority. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52024 WP No. 32634 of 2025 8. From the perusal of the grounds urged in the writ petition, the petitioner has not taken any of the grounds that are listed above the order of suspension with a mala fide intention and it was not issued by the appointing authority. Hence, I do not find any grounds to entertain this writ petition. 9. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following order: ORDER The writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE SKS CT:KHV