- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8617 WP No. 100593 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR WRIT PETITION NO.100593 OF 2025 (S-KSRTC) BETWEEN: SRI. RAVI A.N. S/O LATE A. NAGENDRAPPA AGE. 41 YEARS, ASSISTANT MECHANICAL ENGINEER (GRADE-II), K.S.R.T.C., DAVANAGERE DIVISION, PRESENTLY WORKING AT DISTRICT SKILL DEVELOPMENT OFFICE, DHARWAD AS ASSISTANT DIRECTOR ON DEPUTATION, RAYAPUR, DHARWAD 580009. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHIVARAJU H.B., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, CENTRAL OFFICE, K.H.ROAD, SHANTI NAGAR, BENGALURU 560027. 2. THE DIRECTOR (PERSONNEL & VIGILANCE) KARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, CENTRAL OFFICE, K.H.ROAD, SHANTI NAGAR, BENGALURU 560027. 3. THE DISTRICT SKILL DEVELOPMENT OFFICER DISTRICT SKILL DEVELOPMENT OFFICE, RAYAPUR, DHARWAD 580009. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. P.N. HATTI, HCGP FOR R3; SRI. PRASHANT HOSMANI, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT CORPORATION TO DROP THE DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS BEARING NO. 37:2017-18 DATED 12.05.2017 AS IT IS AGAINST TO THE NORMS PRESCRIBED UNDER ITS OWN CIRCULAR NO.1328 DATED 04.04.2005 VIDE ANNEXURE-P & ETC. VIJAYALAKSHMI M KANKUPPI Digitally signed by VIJAYALAKSHMI M KANKUPPI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench Date: 2025.07.16 14:35:05 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8617 WP No. 100593 of 2025 THIS WRIT 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) 1. Heard learned counsel Sri.Shivaraju H.B. for the petitioner. Learned HCGP Sri.P.N.Hatti is directed to take notice for the respondent No.3-State. Learned counsel Sri.Prashant Hosmani is directed to take notice for respondent Nos.1 and 2. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that he was appointed by the respondent No.1-Corporation as Assistant Mechanical Engineer (Grade-II) at Davanagere Division. Thereafter, the petitioner was put on deputation to Haveri District Skill Development Office as Assistant Director. On 14.10.2022, the respondent-Corporation relieved the petitioner from service with the direction to report to duty at the deputed place along with other staffs. As the petitioner had not reported for duty, the 1st respondent got issued a notice on 04.05.2024 as to why - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8617 WP No. 100593 of 2025 disciplinary action should not be taken against the petitioner for having not returned to the parental department after the expiry of the deputation period. The petitioner replied to the said show cause notice in detail and requested not to initiate any disciplinary action against him. Thereafter, on 06.07.2024, the petitioner submitted a representation to the 2nd respondent to consider his case for promotion to Grade I Junior post. 3. This being the state of affairs, respondent No. 1 addressed a letter to the Deputy Chief Personnel Manager (Discipline), KSRTC, Bengaluru to initiate disciplinary action against the petitioner. The articles of charge were issued to the petitioner on 19.07.2024. The petitioner being aggrieved filed a writ petition in W.P.No.104525 of 2024 and passed articles of charge. The writ petition so filed by the petitioner came to be disposed of holding that the issuance of articles of charge would be a ground for withholding promotion and would not be tenable as respondents would be required to follow sealed cover - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8617 WP No. 100593 of 2025 procedure. Therefore, the Coordinate Bench of this Court refrained from interference. 4. It is the further case of the petitioner that the disciplinary proceedings is still pending and the promotion of the petitioner is kept in a sealed cover to be considered later and no action is taken in pursuing the disciplinary proceedings to be completed despite the proceedings having been initiated on 19.07.2024 by issuing articles of charge. It is the contention of the counsel for the petitioner that all the allegations made against the petitioner are false and only with a malafide intention to withhold or stop the promotion of the petitioner, the present proceedings are initiated by issuance of articles of charge under disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner, which is highly illegal, arbitrary and the same deserves to be set aside. 5. It is also further contented by the counsel for the petitioner that there are no allegations in the entire service of the petitioner. Under the circumstances, it is - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8617 WP No. 100593 of 2025 only with an intent to harass and victimize the petitioner, the enquiry has been initiated and the same instead of disposing has been kept in abeyance, which itself is apparent on the face of the records. Hence the present petition to drop the proceedings and to dispose of the disciplinary proceedings in the earliest in a time bound manner and to release the sealed cover and to consider the promotion of petition. 6. Per contra, the learned counsel Sri.Prashant Hosmani appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 contend that the petition is not maintainable as the prayers are contradicting each other. It is also contended that the proceedings were initially challenged before this Court in the earlier mentioned W.P.No.104525 of 2024, whereby this Court refrained from holding that mere apprehension of issuance of articles of charge would not be a tenable ground to drop the proceedings and directed the respondents to follow the procedure of sealed cover of the promotion of the petitioner. Learned counsel further - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8617 WP No. 100593 of 2025 contends that the disciplinary proceedings are yet to begin. If reasonable time is granted, the same would be completed in accordance with law. 7. Learned HCGP subscribes to the argument put forth by the learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents. 9. During the course of arguments, counsel for the petitioner does not press prayer A to drop the disciplinary proceedings, he would be satisfied if prayer B is considered and done in a time-bound manner. It is apparently seen that the articles of charge were issued on 19.07.2024, but no further action has been taken thereafter, such as conducting the enquiry or disciplinary proceedings. Therefore, since the petitioner is seeking for promotion and the promotion is kept in a safe cover, the disciplinary proceedings would have to be completed in a time bound manner. Once the process is initiated, it cannot be kept in abeyance for eternity. It is the duty and - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8617 WP No. 100593 of 2025 obligation of the disciplinary authority to conduct the proceedings in a time bound manner so that the petitioner who is seeking promotion would be benefited if he is held not to be guilty of any of the charges levelled against him and also for the smooth functioning of the department. Under the circumstances, I pass the following: ORDER i. Petition is partly allowed. ii. A writ of mandamus is issued directing the respondents to dispose of the disciplinary proceedings pending before it, in a time bound manner not later than 3 months from the date of receipt of copy of the order by following due process of law. Sd/- (PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE KGK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5