- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27238-DB WP No. 21475 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JULY, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT WRIT PETITION NO. 21475 OF 2025 (S-KSAT) BETWEEN: SHRI. VASANTH.H, S/O SHRI. NAUMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, WORKING AS ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, NO.1, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, SUB DIVISION, NAZARBAD, MYSURU-570 010. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VIJAYA KUMAR., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560 001. 2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, Digitally signed by K G RENUKAMBA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27238-DB WP No. 21475 of 2025 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001. 3. SHRI V. MAHADEVASWAMY, ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER SERICULTURE DEPARTMENT, MYSURU-570 008. NOW UNDER TRANSFER TO NO.1, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, SUB-DIVISION, NAZARBAD MYSURU-570010 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.B.RAVINDRANATH, AGA, FOR R1 AND R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO (i) TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 08.07.2025 PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL AT BANGALORE IN APPLICATION NO.3077/2025 (VIDE ANNEXURE-A) AND (ii) TO PASS SUCH OTHER ORDER AS THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27238-DB WP No. 21475 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI) The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the order of 26.06.2025 that was impugned before the Tribunal sought to transfer the petitioner. 2. It is stated that an interim order was passed by the Tribunal on 08.07.2025, directing the parties to maintain status quo as on that date. It is contended that, because of the order of the status quo, the petitioner is suffering from hardship and therefore the order deserves to be set aside. 3. The instant Writ Petition is misconceived. The order was passed on the stay application moved by the petitioner. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner states that the Tribunal may be directed to dispose of the original application. We find from the record that the original application itself is of the year 2025 and filed on 02.07.2025. Under the circumstances, such a prayer made - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27238-DB WP No. 21475 of 2025 by the petitioner would be premature. Therefore, we decline to pass such an order. 4. The writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- (JAYANT BANERJI) JUDGE Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE RCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27