SRI CHIDANAND GURUPADAPPA PUDAKAL KATTI v. THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER
WP/103531/2025 · 2025-06-24
Pradeep Singh Yerur
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 49824 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 49824 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7997 WP No. 103531 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JUNE 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR WRIT PETITION NO. 103531 OF 2025 (S-KSRTC) BETWEEN:
SRI. CHIDANAND GURUPADAPPA PUDAKAL KATTI, (C.G. PUDAKAL KATTI) AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER CUM CONDUCTOR, NWKRTC, BELAGAVI DIVISION, 3RD DEPOT, R/O. PO SATTIGERI, GUDAUMKERI, TQ: YERAGATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI-591129. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAVI HEGDE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
THE SENIOR DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER/ DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY, NWKRTC, BELAGAVI DIVISION, DIST: BELAGAVI-590001.
2.
THE DEPOT MANAGER, NWKRTC, 3RD DEPOT, BELAGAVI DIVISION, DIST: BELAGAVI-590001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRASHANT S. HOSAMANI, ADVOCATE FOR R1)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO, A. ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR ORDER QUASHING THE SUSPENSION ORDER DATED 13.05.2025 BEARING NO.VAA.KA.RA.SAA/BE.VI/SHIVA/T- 544(25):1049, VIDE ANNEXURE-C, PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 AND, B. CONSEQUENT UPON QUASHING THE AFORESAID ORDER AS A SEQUEL DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO PUT BACK THE PETITIONER INTO SERVICE IN THE SAME POST AND PLACE HELD BY HIM EARLIER TO IMPUGNED ORDER, BY FIXING OUTER LIMIT AND ETC.
VIJAYALAKSHMI M KANKUPPI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD
BENCH
- 2 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7997 WP No. 103531 of 2025
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR)
Learned counsel for the petitioner is present and so also learned counsel for respondent No.1.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo stating that the suspension order against the petitioner has been revoked and the same is admitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
Under the circumstances, the present petition would not survive for consideration.
Hence the petition stands disposed of as having become infructuous. All contentions of the petitioner are kept open.
Sd/- (PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE gab List No.: 1 Sl No.: 42