- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26186-DB WP No. 15557 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF WRIT PETITION NO.15557 OF 2024 (S-KSAT) BETWEEN: SRI. Y. S. MANJUNATHA S/O LATE K SATHYANARAYANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, WAS WORKING AS ASSISTANT TEACHER GRADE -II, GOVERNMENT HIGH SCHOOL, HEBBAL, NORTH RANGE-2, BANGALORE - 560 024. NOW UNDER AN ORDER OF SUSPENSION, R/AT NO.44, 4TH CROSS, 1ST MAIN, MARUTHI LAYOUT, DASARAHALLI, BANGALORE – 560 024. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SATISH K, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION AND LITERACY, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, M S BUILDING, BANGALORE - 560 001. 2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR (ADMINISTRATION) DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION, BANGALORE NORTH DISTRICT, Digitally signed by MADHUSHREE H Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26186-DB WP No. 15557 of 2024 K.G.ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 009. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VIKAS ROJIPURA, AGA FOR R1 & R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950, PRAYING TO a) SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 31.05.2024 PASSED BY THE HON’BLE KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL IN APPLICATION NO.1723/2024, IN SO FAR AS DENIAL OF REINSTATEMENT OF SERVICE OF THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED (ANNEXURE-A) AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE SAID APPLICATION NO.1723/2024 AS SOUGHT FOR BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE HON’BLE TRIBUNAL (ANNEXURE – B), IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY; c) PASS ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE ORDER AS THIS HON’BLE COURT DEEMS FIT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, INCLUDING THE COST OF THIS WRIT PETITION. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT) The petitioner, an Assistant Teacher, Grade–II is before this Court under Article-226 of the Constitution of India, questioning the order dated 31.05.2024, in Application No.1723 of 2024 by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26186-DB WP No. 15557 of 2024 Bengaluru (for short ‘Tribunal’) wherein the petitioner had questioned the order of suspension dated 06.02.2023. 2. Heard learned counsel Sri.K.Sathish for the petitioner and Sri.Vikas Rojipura, learned counsel for the respondent and perused the writ petition papers. 3. Sri.K.Sathish, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was kept under suspension on 06.02.2023, whereas the charge-memo in respect of the incident on which the petitioner was kept under suspension was issued on 15.03.2024. Learned counsel would submit that in terms of Rule-10 of Karnataka Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal), Rules 1957, if the charge-memo is not issued within 6 months from the date of suspension, the competent authority shall have to decide whether to revoke or continue such Government servant under suspension and unless decided and ordered for continuation of suspension within a period of six months from the date of suspension, the suspension shall be deemed to have been revoked and the Competent Authority has to give posting to such Government Servant. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26186-DB WP No. 15557 of 2024 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that as the order of suspension is beyond six months, the respondent authorities ought to have considered the suspension of the petitioner as ‘deemed revocation’ and ought to have provided posting. In such circumstances, the learned counsel for the petitioner would pray for allowing the writ petition. 5. Learned AGA would submit that the petitioner was kept under suspension on 06.02.2023 and thereafter within six months, the charge-memo dated 05.06.2023 was issued. Subsequently, an additional charge-memo was issued on 15.03.2024. Therefore, he submits that since the charge-memo is issued on 05.06.2023, the respondent need not pass any order as required under Rule-10(5)(b) of the Karnataka Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957 (for short ‘KCS (CCA) Rules, 1957). Thus, he prays for dismissal of the writ petition. 6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the entire writ petition papers, we are of the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26186-DB WP No. 15557 of 2024 view that no interference with the impugned order passed by the Tribunal is required in the facts and circumstances of the case. 7. The petitioner was kept under suspension on 06.02.2023. Within six months as required under Rule-10(5)(b) of KCS (CCA) Rules, 1957, the respondent issued charge-memo on 05.06.2023. Thereafter, an additional charge-memo was issued on 15.03.2024. Issuance of charge-memo on 05.06.2023 is within six months from the date of keeping the writ petitioner under suspension on 06.02.2023. 8. In the case on hand, admittedly charge memo is issued on 05.06.2023, within six months from the date of keeping the petitioner under suspension. In terms of Rule 10 (5)(b) of KCS (CCA) Rules, 1957, deciding whether to revoke or continue such government servant under suspension would arise only in the circumstances where departmental enquiry is not commenced. The departmental enquiry would deemed to have been commenced on the date of issuance of charge memo. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26186-DB WP No. 15557 of 2024 Therefore, in the present fact situation, no order continuing the petitioner under suspension would be necessary. Thus, there is no merit in the writ petition and accordingly writ petition stands dismissed. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE JJ, MPK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25