- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15188 WP No. 107630 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 107630 OF 2025 (S-DIS) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. H. AKASHATA, AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: CHIEF OFFICER ANKOLA, R/O: V.T. ROAD, ANKOLA, TQ: ANKOLA, DIST: UTTARA KANNADA – 581 314. 2. SMT. SHALIAJA S. NAIK, AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: JOINT ENGINEER, R/O: OPP. GOVERNMENT KANNADA PRIMARY SCHOOL, POST. SHRIKULI, ANKOLA, TQ. ANKOLA DIST. UTTARA KANNADA – 581 314. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SANTOSH B. RAWOOT, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, R/BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, VIKAS SOUDHA, BENGALURU 01. 2. THE DIRECTOR MUNCIPAL ADMINISTRATION, 9-10TH FLOOR, VISHWASHWARYYA, TOWER, DR. AMBEDKAR VIDHA, BENGLAURU – 01. 3. THE DISTRICT URBAN DEVELOPMENT CELL, D.C.OFFICE, UTTARA KANNADA, Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15188 WP No. 107630 of 2025 TQ. AND DIST. UTTARA KANNADA – 581 301, R/BY PROJECT DIRECTOR. 4. THE TOWN MUNCIPAL COUNCIL, ANKOLA, DIST. UTTAR KANNADA – 581 314. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP FOR R1 TO R3; SRI. A.P.HEGDE, ADVOCATE FOR R4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR DIRECTIONS BY QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 13/10/2025 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 UNDER ORDER BEARING ORDER BRING NO.1808828 DMA.ENQ-2 BGM1 8 2025 AND ORDER BRING NO.1808828 (1) DMA.ENQ-2 BGM1 8 2025 VIDE ANNEXURE-E AND F RESPECTIVELY, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. PASS ANY SUCH APPROPRIATE ORDERS AS THIS HON BLE COURT DEEMS FIT, JUST AND PROPER IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THIS CASE, IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC., THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING B GROUP THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15188 WP No. 107630 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA) 1. The petitioners are before this Court seeking the following reliefs: A. Issue a writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other writ or directions by quashing the order dated 13/10/2025 passed by the respondent no.2 under order bearing order bring no.1808828 DMA.ENQ-2 BGM1 8 2025 and order bring no.1808828 (1) DMA.ENQ-2 bgm1 8 2025 vide Annexure-E and F respectively, in the interest of justice and equity. B. Pass any such appropriate orders as this Hon’ble court deems fit, just and proper in the circumstances of this case, in the ends of justice and equity. 2. Owing to the submission of the counsel for the petitioners, this Court had passed the following order on 16.10.2025: “The petitioners are before this Court calling in question the order of suspension. The challenge to the order of suspension would generally not be entertained unless it is arbitrary or malafide or without jurisdiction. In the case at hand, the petitioners were issued show cause notice seeking their reply as to why a departmental enquiry should not be initiated and them being placed under suspension for conduct of such departmental enquiry. The notice was issued on 26.09.2025 and it reaches the petitioners on 30.09.2025. Seven days time had been granted to submit their reply. The petitioners seek one more week's time to submit their reply. The reply was submitted on 13.10.2025. The order is also passed on 13.10.2025, which ostensibly - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15188 WP No. 107630 of 2025 does not consider any submission made in the reply. Solely on this ground, the impugned orders shall remain stayed, till the next date of hearing. List the matter on 31.10.2025. Learned HCGP accepts notice for respondent Nos.1 to 3. Issue emergent notice to respondent No.4.” 3. After the grant of interim order, the matter is moved by the learned HCGP on the score that the enquiry against the petitioners is pending and if they are posted back to the same place, there is every chance of tampering the records. The matter is thus posted today. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the matter can be disposed finally. 4. The petition is preferred challenging an order of suspension. The solitary ground of challenge is that a Show Cause Notice was issued to the petitioners on 26.09.2025 by which 7 days time was granted to submit their reply. After the Show Cause Notice reached the petitioners, the 1st petitioner submitted a reply on 03.10.2025 and the 2nd petitioner on 06.10.2025. Again the 1st petitioner submitted a supplementary reply on 13.10.2025 along with supporting documents. On the same day 13.10.2025, the order is passed placing the petitioners - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15188 WP No. 107630 of 2025 under suspension. It is the allegation that the reply submitted by the petitioners have not been taken note of. Learned HCGP Smt.Girija S. Hiremath would submit that there is no question of hearing the government servant before passing an order of suspension. The Show Cause Notice was issued pending departmental enquiry. Therefore, the suspension is nothing to do with the issuance of Show Cause Notice or departmental enquiry. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the Show Cause Notice indicated that action would be taken if reply is not submitted within 7 days from the date of receipt of the notice. The petitioners immediately submitted their reply to the notice. The order of suspension does not take into account any of the documents so submitted. If the documents in reply to the Show Cause Notice were taken into, perhaps the petitioners could not have been placed under suspension. 5. Learned HCGP on instructions would now submit that the objections of the petitioners would be considered and appropriate orders would be passed in accordance with law. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15188 WP No. 107630 of 2025 6. In the light of the only reason projected to seek an interim order or to challenge before this Court, being non- consideration of the objections of the petitioners and in light of the submission of the learned HCGP, I deem it appropriate to dispose the petition with a direction to the respondents to consider the objections of the petitioners to the show cause notice and then pass necessary orders in accordance with law. 7. This order cannot be and shall not be construed that, an opportunity of hearing should be granted prior to passing the order of suspension. Suspension not being a penalty, no natural justice need be followed prior to the passage of order of suspension. The case at hand does not project that natural justice to be followed prior to passage of the order of suspension. It is non-consideration of the objections filed to the show cause notice which led to the order of suspension. Therefore, if the show cause notice has been issued and reply is submitted, the respondent-State is obliged to consider the same and pass necessary orders. 8. For the aforesaid reasons, the following: - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15188 WP No. 107630 of 2025 ORDER a. Petition is allowed in part. b. The impugned order dated 13-10-2025 passed by the respondent No.2 vide Annexures - E & F stand quashed. c. The matter is remitted back to the hands of the respondent-State to consider the objections filed by the petitioners to the show cause notice and pass necessary orders in accordance with law within the time as the Authority would be pleased. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE KGK/CT-ASC/CBC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 33