- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49670-DB RP No. 503 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K REVIEW PETITION NO. 503 OF 2025 BETWEEN: KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA MS BUILDING BENGALURU-560 001 REP BY ITS REGISTRAR …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ASHOK HARANAHALLI, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI. K PRASANNA SHETTY., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AND PANCHAYAT RAJ, M.S BUILDING BENGALURU- 560001 2. THE COMMISSIONER BRUHATH BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE N.R SQUARE BENGALURU-560002. 3. SRI.V.PRASANNA S/O. VENKTESH J AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS ASSISTANT ENGINEER KEMPEGOWDA NAGAR SUB DIVISION H.SIDDAIAH ROAD BBMP OFFICE, BANGALORE-560001 R/AT FLAT NO.303, VAISHNAVI LAYOUT Digitally signed by VASANTHA KUMARY B K Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49670-DB RP No. 503 of 2025 PRAKRUTHI KRISHNA APARTMENT, VIDYARANYAPURA BENGALURU-560097 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MOHAMMED JAFFAR SHAH., ADVOCATE) THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 114 READ WITH ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF CPC PRAYING TO., REVIEW THE ORDER DATED 23.10.2025 PASSED IN WA NO.168/2025 (S-RES) (ANNEXURE - A) IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH) The present review petition has been filed seeking review of the judgment and order dated 05.11.2022 whereby the learned Single Judge has set aside the punishment of withholding of four annual increments with cumulative effect inflicted on the petitioner/respondent No.3-employee namely, Sri V. Prasanna, who was working as an Assistant Engineer in Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP). 2. It was the BBMP which imposed the punishment on the petitioner/respondent No.3. The departmental proceedings - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49670-DB RP No. 503 of 2025 were conducted by the Lokayukta after an order of entrustment was issued under Section 14-A of the Karnataka Civil Service (Classification, Control and Appeals) Rules, 1957. As the BBMP failed to challenge the order dated 05.12.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge setting aside the punishment of withholding of four annual increments with cumulative effect inflicted on the petitioner/respondent No.3, the lokayukta has filed W.A.No.168/2025 which came to rejected as not maintainable. 3 We are recalling the order dated 23.10.2025 and proceed to decide the appeal on merit. Thus, the Review Petition is allowed. 4. The learned Single Judge, in the impugned judgment and order dated 05.12.2022 passed in W.P.No.7060/2021 has set aside the penalty imposed on the petitioner/respondent No.3 by the BBMP on the ground that petitioner/respondent No.3 in the writ petition was working under the Assistant Executive Engineer. The Assistant Engineer is a subordinate officer to the Assistant Executive Engineer. The allegation of charge against the petitioner/respondent No.3 was - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49670-DB RP No. 503 of 2025 that the petitioner along with one Sri A. Ravindra Babu had failed to take timely action on the complaint received in respect of unauthorized construction on Site No.26. The Assistant Engineer was not empowered to take any action on the complaint and it was the Assistant Executive Engineer who ought to have taken action. The learned Single Judge, therefore, was of the view that the charge for not taking any action on the complaint regarding unauthorized construction on Site No.26 against the petitioner/respondent No.3 was wholly unjustified. 5. It may also be noted that the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal had allowed the Application No.7386/2019 filed by Sri A. Ravindra Babu, Assistant Executive Engineer and set aside the punishment imposed on him. 6. Having considered the submissions and also going through the impugned judgment, we are of the considered view that when the Assistant Engineer was not empowered to take action and the authority which was empowered to take action has been exonerated by the Tribunal, the view taken by the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49670-DB RP No. 503 of 2025 learned Single Judge is wholly justified. Accordingly, the writ appeal stands dismissed. Sd/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE Sd/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE RKA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12