- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28216 WP No. 7563 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 7563 OF 2022 (S-RES) BETWEEN: SMT SHAMALA N D/O OF NANJAPPA WIFE OF SHIVAPPA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.42 MANTAPA ROAD NEAR GANGA BHAVANI TEMPLE JANGALPALYA BENNERUGHATTA ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU DISTRICT KARNATAKA-560076. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. BYRE GOWDA N., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF PANCHAYATH RAJ VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU KARNATAKA-560020 2. MANTAPA GRAMA PANCHAYATH JIGANI HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT KARNATAKA-562106 REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT. Digitally signed by HEMALATHA A Location: HIGH COURTOF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28216 WP No. 7563 of 2022 3. PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER MANTAPA GRAMA PANCHAYATH JIGANI HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT-560076. 4. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER TALUK PANCHAYATH NEAR JMFC COURT, ATTIBELE ROAD ANEKAL-562107. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.VIKAS ROJIPURA, AGA FOR R1: SRI. MAHESH R UPPIN, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3: R4 SERVED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 21ST OF JANUARY 2022 PASSED BY 2ND RESPONDENT (ANNEXURE-F) AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD ORAL ORDER 1. In this writ petition, the petitioner has called in question the order dated 21.01.2022 passed by respondent No.2 at Annexure-F and order dated 25.01.2021 passed by respondent No.3 at Annexure-G, whereby the petitioner has been kept under suspension by invoking the provisions of Section 62(d) of the Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 (for short ‘the Act’). - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28216 WP No. 7563 of 2022 2. The case of the petitioner is that she was appointed as Bill Collector on 11.06.2007. Subsequently, her appointment has been approved by the appellate authority on 08.12.2011. Based on a complaint filed by the Panchayat Development Officer for misuse of official seals and issuance of fabricated license, FIR came to be registered against the petitioner in Crime No.3/2022 of Bannerghatta Police Station. Thereafter, the respondent No.3 has passed an order dated 25.01.2021 vide Annexure-G suspending the petitioner from service. Pursuant to the order dated 25.01.2021, the respondent No.2 has passed an order dated 21.01.2022 vide Annexure-F suspending the petitioner from service by invoking the provisions of Section 62(d) of the Act. Being aggrieved by the said orders, the petitioner is before this Court. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from the date of appointment, she is working as a Bill Collector without any blemish on record. Just because, a - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28216 WP No. 7563 of 2022 criminal case has been registered against the petitioner, the impugned suspension orders have been passed. Till today, the departmental enquiry has not been concluded. Neither the petitioner has been reinstated into service nor subsistence allowance has been paid. Hence, he sought for allowing the writ petition. 4. The learned counsel for the respondent Nos.2 and 3 submits that since the allegations against the petitioner is for the offences punishable under Sections 409 and 420 of IPC, departmental enquiry has been initiated and hence, she is kept under suspension by invoking the provisions of Section 62(d) of the Act. There is no error in the impugned orders passed by the respondents. 5. The learned AGA appearing for the respondent-State submits that as the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature and departmental enquiry has also been initiated, the respondent Nos.2 and 3 have rightly exercised the power under Section 62(d) of the Act and - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28216 WP No. 7563 of 2022 kept the petitioner under suspension. There is no error in the impugned orders passed by the respondents. 6. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was appointed as Bill Collector on 11.06.2007 and subsequently, her appointment has been approved by the appellate authority on 08.12.2011. Since FIR has been registered against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Section 409 and 420 of IPC and also departmental enquiry has also been initiated against the petitioner, the impugned orders have been passed by invoking the provisions of Section 62(d) of the Act and petitioner has been kept under suspension. There is no error or illegality in the impugned orders passed by the respondents. 7. However, at this stage, the only relief that can be granted in this writ petition is to direct the respondents to conclude the enquiry as expeditiously as possible, since the suspension order has been passed in the year 2022. Accordingly, the following order is passed: - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28216 WP No. 7563 of 2022 ORDER a) The writ petition is disposed of. b) The respondents are directed to conclude the departmental enquiry as expeditiously as possible. c) The respondents are also directed to pay subsistence allowance to the petitioner for the period the petitioner is kept under suspension. d) Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to submit a representation to the respondents seeking to reinstate her into service. If such a representation is submitted, the respondents are directed to consider the same in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date of representation of the petitioner. Sd/- (H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE DM LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 44