- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39535 WP No. 28152 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 28152 OF 2024 (S-KSRTC) BETWEEN: SMT.PRIYANKA GURAYYA BIDNALMATH, D/O GURAYYA BIDNALMATH, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, OCC: MECHANIC (ELC), KSRTC, TUMKURU DEPOT - 2, TUMKURU - 572 101. …PETITIONER (BY SRI.ANIRUDH.Y.A., ADVOCATE FOR SRI.JAVEED.S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, POST BAG - 2778, K H ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 027. 2. THE DIVISION CONTROLLER, APPOINTING AUTHORITY, KSRTC, TUMKURU DIVISION, TUMKURU - 572 101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.H.R.RENUKA., ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS. Digitally signed by THEJAS KUMAR N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39535 WP No. 28152 of 2024 THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER Sri.Anirudh.Y.A., counsel on behalf of Sri.Javeed.S., for the petitioner and Smt.H.R.Renuka., counsel for respondents 1 and 2 have appeared in person. 2. The order dated 14.08.2024 vide Annexure-F is called into question in this Writ Petition on several grounds as set-out in the Memorandum of Writ Petition. 3. Counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions. Counsel for the petitioner in presenting his argument submits that the petitioner is working on full time job, 24 X 7 in all 365 days, hence the Corporation could not have removed the name of the petitioner from the Selection List. Placing reliance on Annexures-G and H, counsel argued by saying that similar Writ Petitions have been allowed by this Court and therefore, the impugned order is liable to be quashed and the Writ Petition may be allowed. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39535 WP No. 28152 of 2024 By way of reply, counsel Smt.H.R.Renuka., raised preliminary objection regarding maintainability of the Writ Petition. She submits that petitioner was a Trainee. She argued by saying that removal of petitioner's name from the Selection List involves disputed questions of facts, hence the petitioner cannot question the order of removal directly under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Counsel therefore, submits that the Writ Petition may be dismissed. Heard the arguments and perused the Writ papers with care. 4. The issue falls within a narrow compass and relates to removal of the petitioner's name from the Selection List. The petitioner contends that she was appointed as a Mechanic in the establishment of the Corporation. It is pivotal to note that a show cause notice was issued on 29.06.2024 and it appears that the petitioner has replied to the same. The petitioner's name was removed from the Selection List as she had violated Rule 4(9) of Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (Cadre and Recruitment) Regulations, 1982. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39535 WP No. 28152 of 2024 Rule 4(9) of Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (Cadre and Recruitment) Regulations, 1982 reads as under: "4. Eligibility for Appointment and disqualifications for appointment:- 1) xxxx xxxx xxxx 9) Any person who has given false or wrong information in the application will be disqualified and if appointed and found at a later date that he has given false or wrong information, his services shall be terminated." The Regulation provides for termination of services if a person has given false or wrong information. In the present case, the Corporation vide order dated 14.08.2024, removed the petitioner's name from the Selection List. The removal of name from the selection list involves disputed questions of facts and it requires evidence, as the issue relates to furnishing of a fake marks sheet by the petitioner. The law is well settled that the disputed questions of fact cannot be investigated under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The decisions at Annexures-G and H pertains to KPTCL & BESCOM and they are - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39535 WP No. 28152 of 2024 not applicable to the Corporation. Needless to say the Corporation has its own Regulations. As the issue involved in the present Writ Petition involves disputed questions of fact, I decline to exercise power under writ jurisdiction. The Writ Petition is liable to be rejected. 5. Resultantly, the Writ Petition is rejected. Because of rejection of the Writ Petition, pending interlocutory applications if any are disposed of and interim order granted if any stands discharged. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE TKN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25