- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38698-DB WP No. 12531 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH 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. 12531 OF 2023 (S-KSAT) BETWEEN: THE ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR OF ENQUIRIES (2) KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA M S BUILDING DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE -560 001. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VENKATESH S ARBATTI, ADV.) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT HOME DEPARTMENT M S BUILDING DR. B R AMBEDKAR VEEHI BANGALORE- 560 001. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL AND INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE NO.2, NRUPATHUGA ROAD BANGALORE -560 002. 3. THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL IN KARNATAKA OFFICE OF THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL IN KARNATAKA, PARK HOUSE ROAD BANGALORE -560 001. Digitally signed by NANJUNDACHARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38698-DB WP No. 12531 of 2023 4. SI KUMAR S KARNING S/O LATE S H KARNING AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS RETIRED SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE R/AT NO.80, SRI SAI KRUPA 2ND CROSS, UDAYANA NAGAR CHIKKAKALASANDRA BANGALORE- 560 061. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B RAVINDRANATH, AGA FOR R1 TO R3 SRI SATISH DODDAMANI, SR. ADV. FOR SRI SAGAR B. B., ADV. FOR R4) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF A WRIT THEREBY QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 04/01/2018 PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL AT BANGALORE IN APPLICATION NO.5203/2016, AS PER ANNEXURE-A AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, 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) Though the matter is listed for orders, with the consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties, the matter is taken up for final disposal. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38698-DB WP No. 12531 of 2023 2. Heard learned counsel Sri.Venkatesh S. Arbatti for petitioner, learned Additional Government Advocate Sri.B.Ravindranath for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and learned senior counsel Sri.Satish Doddamani for Sri.B.B.Sagar, learned counsel for respondent No.4. Perused the entire writ petition papers. 3. The petitioner – Upa-Lokayukta represented by Registrar is before this Court aggrieved by order dated 04.01.2018 in Application No.5203/2016 passed by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal at Bengaluru (for short, ‘the Tribunal’), allowing the fourth respondent’s application quashing articles of charge dated 24.06.2015 solely on the ground that it is barred by Rule 214(2)(b)(ii) of KCSRs. 4. Learned counsel Sri.Venkatesh S. Arbatti for petitioner would contend that since the charge against the respondent No.4 is very serious, in that, demand and acceptance of bribe, the Tribunal ought not to have - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38698-DB WP No. 12531 of 2023 applied Rule 214(2)(b)(ii) of KCSRs to quash the articles of charge. 5. Per contra, learned senior counsel Sri.Satish Doddamani would submit that the bar contained under Rule 214(2)(b)(ii) of KCSRs would have application in the present case, since the charge memo is issued on 24.06.2015 which is beyond four years from the date of an incident and since respondent No.4 retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.03.2013. Thus, he prays for dismissal of the writ petition. 6. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusal of the entire writ petition papers, we do not find any error or illegality in the order passed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal rightly applied Rule 214(2)(b)(ii) of KCSRs and rightly quashed the articles of charge dated 24.06.2015. 7. Rule 214(2)(b)(ii) of KCSRS reads as follows: - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38698-DB WP No. 12531 of 2023 “(b) The departmental proceedings, if not instituted while the Government servant was in service, whether before his retirement or during his re-employment.- (i) xxxx (ii) shall not be in respect of any event which took place more than four years before such institution. (iii) xxxx” The above Rule prohibits initiation of enquiry against a retired Government servant in respect of any event which took place more than four years before such institution. Institution of enquiry is explained in Sub-Rule (6) of Rule 214 of KCSRs. In terms of Sub-Rule (6) of Rule 214 of KCSRs, the date of issuance of articles of charge or filing of charge sheet would be the date of initiation of enquiry. Application of Rule 214(2)(b)(ii) of KCSRs would not depend on the nature or gravity of charge. In terms of the timeline prescribed therein, no enquiry against a retired Government servant could be instituted in respect of an - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38698-DB WP No. 12531 of 2023 event that had taken place more than four years prior to the date of institution. 8. In the instant case, the respondent retired on 31.03.2013, enquiry is instituted by issuing articles of charge dated 24.06.2015, which is beyond four years from the date of the incident which had taken place on 19.01.2010, 22.02.2010 and 12.04.2010. 9. For the reasons recorded above, there is no merit in the writ petition. Accordingly, writ petition stands rejected. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE NC CT:bms List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1