- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54294-DB WP No. 37009 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF WRIT PETITION NO. 37009 OF 2025 (S-KSAT) BETWEEN: SRI H R RAVI S/O H.R. RANGAIAH AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, WORKING AS SURVEYOR ON DEPUTATION OFFICE THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS, DEPARTMENT OF SURVEY SETTLEMENT AND LAND RECORDS YELAHANKA, BANGALORE-560064 R/A NO.13, SRIRANGAM NIVASA, 2ND CROSS, SANTOSHNAGAR, ATTUR, YELHANKA BANGALORE-560064. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHIVAPRASAD SHANTANAGOUDAR., ADVOCATE) Digitally Signed by REKHA R Location : High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54294-DB WP No. 37009 of 2025 AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REVENUE DEPARTMENT (LAND RECORDS) REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, M S BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001. 2. THE COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF SURVEY SETTLEMENT AND LAND RECORDS K R CIRCLE BENGALURU-560001. 3. THE TECHNIAL ASSISTANT TO THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND THE EX OFFICIO DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT, K G ROAD, BENGALURU-560009. 4. ASSISTANT DIRECOR OF LAND RECORDS DEPARTMENT OF SURVEY SETTLEMENT AND LAND RECORDS, YELAHANKA BENGALURU-560064. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.VIKAS ROJIPURA., AGA) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54294-DB WP No. 37009 of 2025 THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO a) SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 27/11/2025 PASSED BY THE HONBLE KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL IN APPLICATION NO.4190/2025 VIDE ANNEXURE-A; b)ISSUING A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION QUASHING THE SUSPENSION ORDER BEARING NO.SIBBANDI.SHISHTHU23/2025-26 DATED 10/09/2025 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 VIDE ANNEXURE-A7; c) ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO REINSTATE THE PETITIONER TO HIS ORIGINAL POSITION FORTHWITH ALL CONSEQUENTIAL BENEFITS. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54294-DB WP No. 37009 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD) The petitioner, [‘a Land Surveyor' with the office of the Assistant Director of Land Records, Yelahanka] is kept under suspension by the second respondent by the order dated 10.09.2025 subject to commencement of disciplinary proceedings. The petitioner has called this order in question in his Application No.4190/2025 on the file of the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, Bengaluru [for short, 'the Tribunal']. The Tribunal, by its impugned order dated 27.11.2025, has rejected the application opining that the application is devoid of merit. The Tribunal has opined that the third respondent has kept the petitioner under suspension upon examination of materials and being satisfied that there is a prima facie case. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54294-DB WP No. 37009 of 2025 2. The Tribunal has observed that the petitioner is kept under suspension on the instructions of the concerned Minister, but the Tribunal has concluded that the revenue Sketch prepared by the petitioner has been interfered with by the third respondent in the quasi judicial proceedings on the ground that the Sketch is prepared without verifying the survey records; more specifically, another survey Sketch is produced as Annexure-R1 before the Tribunal. 3. Sri Shivaprasad Shantanagoudar, the learned Counsel for the petitioner, submits that the Tribunal has erred in rejecting the petitioner's application overlooking these circumstances. [a] The petitioner was kept under suspension on the oral instructions of the Minister. [b] The petitioner was instructed by his superiors about the failure to conduct the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54294-DB WP No. 37009 of 2025 survey on receipt of information of a complaint lodged by an individual with the office of the Lokayukta. [c] The decision to keep the petitioner under suspension is premised in the assertion that the petitioner in preparing the subject sketch has accepted that the complainant was in possession of Government land contrary to the records. 4. Sri Shivaprasad Shantanagoudar emphasizes that the subject Sketch itself records that the petitioner has undertaken the exercise of survey and he has only earmarked the area claimed by the complainant without any comment on title or possession. The learned counsel argues that the third respondent’s conclusion in the quasi-judicial proceedings would not be material insofar as the procedure adopted by the petitioner to complete the survey; and the learned counsel emphasizes that the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54294-DB WP No. 37009 of 2025 Sketch is dated 10.09.2025, the decision in the State Government’s appeal is on 11.09.2025 and the answering respondents are the jurisdictional Tahsildar and the Assistant Director Land Records and another Surveyor without issuance of notice. 5. Sri Vikas Rojipura, a learned Additional Government Advocate, who is called upon to accept notice for the respondents, submits that the principal allegation against the petitioner is that he has prepared the Sketch without examining the records to find out whether the petitioner was in possession of another and he has earmarked the 'Government land' as the land claimed by the complainant. The learned Additional Government Advocate submits that a prima facie case is ascertained by the third respondent before keeping the petitioner under suspension. In the alternative, the learned Additional Government Advocate, submits that this Court, if inclined to interfere, must ensure that the - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54294-DB WP No. 37009 of 2025 departmental proceedings under contemplation are not impeded and that the petitioner does not get a right to claim the post that he was holding when kept under suspension. 6. The rival submissions are considered on perusal of the records. The stand out factor is that there was a complaint by a private individual with the Lokayukta on the failure of the petitioner to conduct the survey based on his application. The office of the Lokayukta has caused communication in this regard to the petitioner's superiors who have instructed the petitioner to conduct a survey. The petitioner has conducted the survey but only to mark in the Sketch prepared by him the area claimed by the complainant with no further observation on his possession or title thereof. The fact that the petitioner has not observed that the complainant is in possession would be the second standout factor. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54294-DB WP No. 37009 of 2025 7. The third respondent has opined that according to the survey records, the land allotted to the petitioner is in the occupation of a third person, and the petitioner has prepared the Sketch overlooking this factor. Whether this is indeed so, and if indeed it is so, whether it would be a reason to infer misconduct is a matter for examination in the inquiry that would be. However, this Court is of the definite opinion that if the petitioner has not recorded the complainant's possession but has only observed in the Sketch that the land earmarked as claimed by the complainant and this is in the backdrop of the pending complaint before the Lokayukta. This deserves to be considered to examine whether the petitioner must continue to be under suspension, and this Court concludes that the circumstances do not warrant the same. 8. The Tribunal has overlooked these material circumstances in rejecting the petitioner's - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54294-DB WP No. 37009 of 2025 application warranting interference by this Court but the petitioner cannot seek his reinstatement in the post and the third respondent must issue orders for the petitioner's posting at another place which could be vacant and such posting cannot in any manner impede the departmental proceedings that is under contemplation. In the light of the afore, the following: ORDER [a] The petition is allowed. [b] The Tribunal's impugned order dated 27.11.2025 in Application No.4190/2025 [Annexure-A] is quashed setting aside the third respondent's order dated 10.09.2025. [c] The third respondent is directed, within eight [8] weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, to give a posting to the petitioner other than the post which he held as of the date of the order dated 10.09.2025. It is needless to observe that - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54294-DB WP No. 37009 of 2025 the contemplated proceedings shall not be impeded howsoever by the outcome in this petition. Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE Sd/- (T.M. NADAF) JUDGE AN/-