- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39994 WP No. 13272 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI WRIT PETITION NO. 13272 OF 2023 (S-RES) BETWEEN: MAYANNA S/O LATE NARAYANA @ CHURIKARA MAYANNA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS OCC-EVALUATOR W/A OFFICE OF THE ASST.REVENUE OFFICER K R PURAM SUB DIVISION BRUHATH BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE BENGALURU-560036 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. CHANDRASHEKAR G M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER BRUHATH BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE N R SQUARE BENGALURU-560002. Digitally signed by SUNITHA K S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39994 WP No. 13272 of 2023 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER ADMINISTRATION BRUHATH BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE N R SQUARE BENGALURU-560002. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SUBRAMANI M A., ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-CALL FOR RECORDS, QUASH THE IMPUGNED SUSPENSION ORDER DATED 12/06/2023 BEARING NO. B12(1G)PR/175/2022-23 ISSUED BY THE R-2 VIDE ANNEXURE-N AND DIRECT THE R-1 AND 2 TO REINSTATE THE PETITIONER WITH THE EVALUATOR POST AS PER THE PROMOTION ORDER DTD 11/10/2021 ISSUED BY THE DPC, VIDE ANNEXURE-A WITH ALL CONSEQUENTIAL SERVICE BENEFITS. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39994 WP No. 13272 of 2023 ORAL ORDER Petitioner filed this petition challenging the order of suspension dated 12.06.2023, passed by respondent No.2 vide Annexure-N and also sought for a mandamus directing respondents No.1 and 2 to reinstate the petitioner with the Evaluator post as per the promotion order dated 11.10.2021, issued by the DPC vide Annexure-A. 2. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this writ petition are as follows: 2.1. The petitioner was appointed as an SDA in the respondents-Corporation on 23.01.2002. In the light of the letter dated 30.04.2022 issued by the Police Superintendent, Anti-Corruption Bureau, the suspension order was issued against the petitioner and deputed in the Office of the Joint Director (Animal Husbandry), BBMP, Bengaluru. The order of suspension was not communicated to the petitioner as per the letter dated 30.04.2022. The petitioner filed a writ petition in WP - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39994 WP No. 13272 of 2023 No.19527/2022 challenging the withdrawal of order of promotion of the petitioner. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court disposed of the writ petition observing that, the pending enquiry should be expedited and to be completed not later than three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. The petitioner submitted a representation and sought to depute him and show his posting in order to discharge his duties. The respondents failed to do so. The Enquiry Officer submitted a report on 28.04.2023 stating that, there was no such establishment of case to prove the charges alleged against the petitioner by the Corporation. Respondents-Corporation ought to have closed the disciplinary proceedings and reinstated the petitioner with all consequential benefits. But on the contrary, the respondent has passed an order of suspension dated 12.06.2023. 3. The petitioner, aggrieved by the order of suspension, filed this petition. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39994 WP No. 13272 of 2023 4. The respondents filed a statement of objections and additional statement of objections. In the additional statement of objections filed by the respondents, the respondents have stated that the order of suspension was revoked vide order dated 29.02.2024 as per Annexure-R3 and directed the petitioner to report to the duty. Hence, prays to dismiss the writ petition. 5. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, while passing a suspension order, respondent No.2 intentionally and deliberately not referred the enquiry report submitted by the Enquiry Officer and there is a suppression of material facts. He also submits that, the respondent, before passing the suspension order, has failed to follow the CCA Rules, 1957. Hence, he submits that, the order of suspension is bad in law and liable to be set aside. Hence, he prays to allow the writ petition. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39994 WP No. 13272 of 2023 7. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that, the order of suspension was revoked vide order dated 29.02.2024 as per Annexure-R3 and he submits that, the petitioner was directed to report to the duty. He submits that, in view of the order passed by the respondents vide order dated 29.02.2024 as per Annexure-R3, nothing survives for consideration in this writ petition and accordingly, prays to dismiss the writ petition. 8. Perused the records and considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties. 9. There is no dispute that the respondents passed an order of suspension of the petitioner from service i.e., the impugned order. The respondents have filed additional statement of objections contending that, the order of suspension was revoked as per Annexure-R3 vide order dated 29.02.2024, and directed the petitioner to report to the duty. Respondents have produced the order of revocation of order of suspension vide Annexure-R3. The - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39994 WP No. 13272 of 2023 said order was passed during the pendency of this writ petition. In view of the order passed by the respondents vide Annexure-R3, the order of suspension was revoked. In view of the same, nothing survives for consideration in this writ petition. 10. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. 11. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that, if the petitioner reports to the duty, the respondents will permit the petitioner to discharge his duties. His submission is placed on record. Sd/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE PA CT:KHV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21