Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 61683 (KAR)

SHRI SANTOSH S/O DAREPPA HALLUR v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/108904/2025 · 2025-12-05

M Nagaprasanna

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17358 WP No. 108904 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 108904 OF 2025 (S-TR) BETWEEN: SHRI. SANTOSH S/O. DAREPPA HALLUR AGE. 43 YEARS, OCC. CPI, ATHANI CIRCLE, BELAGAVI, OFFICE ADDRESS ATHANI POLICE STATION, TQ. ATHANI, DIST. BELAGAVI 591304 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ROHIT NAGESH LATUR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS ADDL CHIEF SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS, M. S. BUILDING, VIKAS SOUDHA, BANGALORE 560001. 2. THE DIRECTORATE GENERAL INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE CENTRAL POSTING, NO.2, NRUPATUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE-560001. 3. THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE NORTHERN RANGE, BELAGAVI, SUBHAS NAGAR, BELAGAVI 5900016. 4. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE SUBHAS NAGAR, BELAGAVI 590016 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, ADVOCATE) RAKESH S HARIHAR Digitally signed by RAKESH S HARIHAR Date: 2025.12.09 11:55:17 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17358 WP No. 108904 of 2025 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A WRIT/ORDER/DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI AND MAY KINDLY BE PLEASED TO QUASH THE ORDER OF LIEN CHANGE DATED 109-11-2025 BEARING NO.HRM-1(10)/42/2025-26, O.B.NO.947/2025 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.2, PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-D, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC., THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA) 1. This Court, on 01.12.2025, had passed the following order: “The petitioner is before this court seeking the following prayer: i) a writ/order direction in the nature of certiorari and may kindly be pleased to quash the order of lien change dated 19.11.2025 bearing No.HRM-1(10)/42/2025-26, O.B. 947/2025 passed by Respondent No.2, produced at Annexure-D, in the interest of justice and equity. ii) A Writ/order/direction in the nature of certiorari and may kindly be pleased to quash the order directing the petitioner to take charge at internal security division, Bangalore vide order dated 21.11.2025 bearing No.SIBBANDI-2, EV/MISHRA/228/2025 produced at Annexure-E passed by Respondent No.4, in the interest of justice and equity. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17358 WP No. 108904 of 2025 iii) Any other writ or direction or order the petitioner is found entitled to in the ends of justice. The petitioner is a government servant working in the police department. The learned HCGP submits that the grievance of the petitioner will have to be addressed only by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, as it is the Court of first instance. The submission of the learned HCGP merits acceptance. As it stands answered by the 7 Judge Bench decision on the case of L. Chandrakumar v. Union of India and others reported in AIR 1997 SC 1125, wherein the Apex Court has held as follows: “97. The suggestions that we have made in respect of appointments to Tribunals and the supervision of their administrative function need to be considered in detail by those entrusted with the duty of formulating the policy in this respect. That body will also have to take into consideration the comments of expert bodies like the LCI and the Malimath Committee in this regard. We, therefore, recommend that the Union of India initiate action in this behalf and after consulting all concerned, place all these Tribunals under one single nodal department, preferably the Legal Department.” - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17358 WP No. 108904 of 2025 The 7 Judge Bench holds that the Court of first instance for all the government servants for any grievance is the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal. Therefore, the petitioner will have to avail the remedy of filing an appeal. However, the petitioner seeks time. List the matter on 9.12.2025 in the fresh matters.“ 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner files a memo seeking to withdraw the petition. 3. In view of the memo, the petition is withdrawn with liberty to approach the appropriate forum to challenge the impugned order. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE AC CT:ANB List No.: 2 Sl No.: 1