- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32941-DB WP No. 16169 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND WRIT PETITION NO. 16169 OF 2025 (S-KSAT) BETWEEN: 1. KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA M.S. BUILDING BENGALURU-560 001 REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR. 2. THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF ENQUIRIES M.S. BUILDING BENGALURU-560 001 REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. MALLIKARJUN REDDY K. S., ADV.) AND: 1. MR. SRIRANGA RAJAPURE S/O. YADU RAJAPURE, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, ASST. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ON DEPUTATION TO BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, O/O. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, HEAD OFFICE, BBMP, BENGALURU. R/AT NO.110, 3RD MAIN, VINAYAKA LAYOUT, Digitally signed by MARIGANGAIAH PREMAKUMARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32941-DB WP No. 16169 of 2025 PUTTENAHALLI, YELAHANKA, BENGALURU - 560 064. 2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND PANCHAYATH RAJ DEPARTMENT DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU-560 001. 3. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY PUBLIC WORKS, PORTS AND INLAND WATER TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.B RAVINDRANATH, AGA FOR R1 AND R3) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF A WRIT THEREBY QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 15.07.2019 PASSED BY THE KAT AT BANGALORE IN A.NO-1568/2017 AS PER ANNEXURE-A 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 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32941-DB WP No. 16169 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT) The petitioners, Karnataka Lokayukta represented by its Registrar are before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, questioning the order dated 15.07.2019 in Applications No.1568/2017 and 2519/2017 whereunder, the application of respondent No.1, questioning the order of entrustment dated 18.07.2016 (Annexure-A8) as well as Articles of Charge dated 04.11.2016 (Annexure-A10) are quashed. 2. The brief facts of the case are that: On a complaint of the year 2007, after investigation, a report under Section 12(3) of the Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984 was submitted in the year 2016. Thereafter, under impugned order dated 18.07.2016, enquiry under Rule 14-A of the Karnataka Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeals) Rules, 1957 (for short “CCA Rules”) was entrusted to the petitioner-Lokayukta. The petitioners, consequently issued Articles of Charge dated - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32941-DB WP No. 16169 of 2025 04.11.2016 (Annexure-A10). Both entrustment order and Articles of Charge were the subject matters of Application No.1568/2017 and Application No.2519/2017. The Tribunal, under impugned order dated 15.07.2019 quashed the entrustment of enquiry as well as Articles of Charge on the ground of delay of 11 years in issuance of Articles of Charge. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners are before this Court. 3. To the Court query as to what is the explanation for delay of more than 5 years in preferring the writ petition, there is no answer from the learned counsel for the petitioners. Even the petition averments would also not indicate any cause or reason for delay of more than 5 years in filing the present writ petition. 4. The Tribunal passed the impugned order on 15.07.2019 whereas the present writ petition is filed before this Court on 02.06.2025, after more than 5 years after passing the impugned order. Though Article 226 of - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32941-DB WP No. 16169 of 2025 the Constitution of India would not prescribe time limit, the writ petition shall be filed within a reasonable time from the date of cause of action. The inordinate delay of more than 5 years is not explained by the petitioners. Moreover, respondent No.1 has attained the age of superannuation and he is aged more than 62 years as on this date. 5. It is seen from the petition papers that on the complaint of the year 2007, investigation report under Section 12(3) of Karnataka Lokayukta Act is submitted in the year 2016 after more than 9 years. Thereafter, the enquiry is entrusted to Lokayukta in the year 2017 and charge memo is issued on 04.11.2016, nearly after 10 years from the date of complaint. Therefore, the Tribunal, in the facts and circumstances is justified in allowing the applications only on the question of unexplained delay of 11 years in initiating enquiry. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32941-DB WP No. 16169 of 2025 6. We do not see any ground to interfere with the order of the Tribunal. Accordingly, the writ petition stands rejected. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE MPK CT:bms List No.: 1 Sl No.: 64