- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38014-DB WP No. 27631 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND WRIT PETITION NO. 27631 OF 2025 (S-KSAT) BETWEEN: MOHAMMED MUNEER S/O B AHMED, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS PRESENTLY WORKING AS SUPERINTENDENT, MANGALURU URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY DAKSHINA KANNADA- 575 006. RESIDING AT: HAMCO TITANIA APARTMENT, FLAT NO.503, 5TH FLOOR, MANGALADEVI ROAD, BOLARA, MANGALORE- 575 001. &PETITIONER (BY SRI. MUHAMMAD SHAMIL, ADV.) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE M.S.BUILDING, DR. B R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU- 560 001. 2. REGIONAL COMMISSIONER MYSORE DIVISION NO. 8J7Q AND J73, HIGH VIEW, VINOBA ROAD, OPPOSITE: KALAMANDIR MYSURU- 570 055. &RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.B RAVINDRANATH, AGA FOR R1 & R2) Digitally signed by NANJUNDACHARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38014-DB WP No. 27631 of 2025 THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS FROM THE RESPONDENTS; ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ORDER QUASHING/SETTING ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 21.08.2025 PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, PRINCIPAL BENCH AT BENGALURU IN APPLICATION NO. 3002/2025 (ANNEXURE-A) AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE SAID APPLICATION NO.3002/2025 AS PRAYED FOR BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL (ANNEXURE-B), TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT) The petitioner is before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India questioning the order dated 21.08.2025 in Application No.3002/2025 passed by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal at Bengaluru (for short, 8the Tribunal9) rejecting the petitioner9s prayer to quash the order of transfer O.M., dated 30.06.2025 insofar as petitioner is concerned. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38014-DB WP No. 27631 of 2025 2. Heard learned counsel Sri.Muhammad Shamil for petitioner and learned Additional Government Advocate Sri.B.Ravindranath for respondents. Perused the entire writ petition papers. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner Sri.Muhammad Shamil for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was transferred and posted at Mangalore Urban Development Authority, Mangaluru (for short, 8MUDA9) by O.M., dated 03.07.2023 (Annexure-A1) and since then he was working at Mangaluru. As the petitioner is a Group-C official working as Superintendent has not completed minimum period of four years. Under impugned order dated 30.06.2025 (Annexure-A3), the petitioner is transferred from MUDA to the Office of the Deputy Tahasildar, Mudabidri. Questioning the said order, petitioner was before the Tribunal and under impugned order, the Tribunal rejected the petitioner9s application. Questioning the order passed by the Tribunal as well as - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38014-DB WP No. 27631 of 2025 the order of transfer, the petitioner is before this Court in this writ petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner Sri.Muhammad Shamil would contend that the petitioner9s transfer is premature and no other officer is posted to work as Superintendent at MUDA. Further, learned counsel would submit that the petitioner has to look after his aged mother and he has three minor children to look after. Therefore, learned counsel would pray for continuing the petitioner till he completes the tenure at Mangaluru. 5. Taking note of the fact that no other person is posted to petitioner9s place, we had directed the learned Additional Government Advocate to find out as to whether the post of Superintendent at MUDA is vacant or any other person is posted to the said place. 6. Learned Additional Government Advocate files memo dated 22.09.2025 stating that one Smt.Rupa.B.C., - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38014-DB WP No. 27631 of 2025 is posted to MUDA temporarily for a period of six months on deputation. 7. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on taking note of the memo dated 22.09.2025, we are of the considered view that the petitioner would not be entitled for the relief as sought in the writ petition. 8. The petitioner belongs to Revenue Department and he was on deputation to MUDA as Superintendent. The petitioner has worked for more than two years in the deputation post. The tenure was not fixed for the petitioner9s deputation. Therefore, we do not find any error in repatriating or transferring the petitioner from MUDA, to the office of the Deputy Tahasildar, Mudabidri by withdrawing his services from MUDA. Further, it is noticed that one Smt.Rupa.B.C., is posted to work at MUDA in place of the petitioner. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38014-DB WP No. 27631 of 2025 9. The transfer and posting/deputation is not a condition of service, but it is only an incidence of service. In that view of the matter, we do not find any merit in the writ petition and accordingly, writ petition stands rejected. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE NC CT:bms List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22