- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26916-DB WP No. 21138 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF WRIT PETITION NO. 21138 OF 2025 (S-KSAT) BETWEEN: SMT. ROOPA BAI T W/O. JAI PRAKASH T.B., AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, WAS WORKING AS INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, ARASIKERE RANGE, HASSAN DISTRICT- 573 103. UNDER AN ORDER OF POSTING AS INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, PANDAVAPURA SUB-DIVISION, MANDYA- 573434. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRITHVEESH M. K., ADV.) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE (EXCISE), VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE- 560 001. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, DEPARTMENT OF EXCISE 2ND FLOOR, TTMC BUILDING, 'A' BLOCK, BMTC, K. H. ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 027. Digitally signed by MARIGANGAIAH PREMAKUMARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26916-DB WP No. 21138 of 2025 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, DEPARTMENT OF EXCISE HASSAN DISTRICT, HASSAN - 573 201. 4. SMT. RAMYA H.D., MAJOR, WAS WORKING INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, PANDAVAPURA SUB-DIVISION, MANDYA- 573434. CURRENTLY WORKING AS INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, ARASIKERE RANGE, HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 103. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VIJAYA SIMHA REDDY D.V., ADV. FOR C/R4 SRI B RAVINDRANATH, AGA FOR R1 TO R3) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS FROM THE RESPONDENT NOS. 1 TO 3; ISSUE A WRIT OR ORDER SETTING ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 08.07.2025 PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL AT BENGALURU IN APPLICATION NO.2203/2025 (ANNEXURE-A) AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE SAID APPLICATION NO. 2203/2025 AS PRAYED FOR BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL (ANEXURE-C), TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26916-DB WP No. 21138 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT) Petitioner, aggrieved by order dated 08.07.2025 in Application No.2202/2025 passed by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal at Bengaluru (for short, ‘the Tribunal’), wherein the petitioner’s application challenging the order of transfer and posting of fourth respondent in her place under order dated 09.05.2025 is rejected. 2. Heard learned counsel Sri.Prithveesh.M.K., for petitioner, learned Additional Government Advocate Sri.B.Ravindranath for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and learned counsel Sri.Vijaya Simha Reddy.D.V., for respondent No.4. Perused the entire writ petition papers. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner on promotion was posted as Inspector of Excise to Arasikere Range, Hassan District under order dated 10.03.2022 and it is stated that on 14.03.2022, she took charge at Arasikere Range. Further, it is submitted - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26916-DB WP No. 21138 of 2025 that under impugned order dated 09.05.2025, the petitioner is transferred from Arasikere to Pandavapura Sub-Division and fourth respondent is posted in her place to Arasikere Range. Learned counsel would submit that the transfer of the petitioner is premature and no reasons are recorded for premature transfer. Further, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in terms of the transfer guidelines dated 24.06.2024, the tenure for Group-C post is four years and the petitioner has not completed four years. Thus, learned counsel would submit that the Tribunal is not justified in rejecting the petitioner’s application. 4. Learned counsel would submit that the Tribunal committed an error in coming to the conclusion that as the impugned order of transfer is implemented, the Tribunal has no power to interfere with the order of transfer and placing reliance on the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of T.SUNEEL KUMAR, IPS VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA (ILR 2013 KAR 4564), learned - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26916-DB WP No. 21138 of 2025 counsel would submit that implementation of the order of transfer would not be an impediment to interfere with the order of the Tribunal. Thus, learned counsel would pray for allowing the writ petition. 5. Learned Additional Government Advocate Sri.B.Ravindranath as well as learned counsel Sri.Vijaya Simha Reddy.D.V., would support the order passed by the Tribunal. Further, they submit that the transfer of the petitioner and posting of fourth respondent is approved by the Chief Minister. Hence, the Tribunal is justified in rejecting the application of the petitioner. Learned counsel Sri.Vijaya Simha Reddy.D.V., would invite attention of this Court to Annexure-R1 and submits that the transfer of the petitioner as well as posting of fourth respondent is approved by the Chief Minister as required under the Transfer Guidelines. It is submitted that as the order of transfer is approved by the Chief Minister, the Tribunal is justified in rejecting the petitioner’s application. Thus, they pray for dismissal of the writ petition. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26916-DB WP No. 21138 of 2025 6. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusal of the entire writ petition papers, we are of the considered view that the order of the Tribunal requires interference. 7. The petitioner and respondent No.4 are in the cadre of Excise Inspector in the Excise Department. The petitioner was posted to Arasikere Range as Excise Inspector under order dated 10.03.2022 and she took charge on the said post on 14.03.2022. The post of Excise Inspector is Group-C post and it was provided with minimum tenure of four years under the Transfer Guidelines dated 13.06.2022, which was prevailing at the time of order of transfer. 8. It is to be noted here that under the Karnataka Civil Services (Excise Department Officers and Officials Transfer) Rules, 2025, the minimum tenure has been reduced to three years for Group-C, but the said Rule is - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26916-DB WP No. 21138 of 2025 prospective and the same would be applicable for counseling transfers. 9. Admittedly, the petitioner has not completed minimum tenure of four years. The Transfer of the petitioner is premature. Premature transfer under the transfer guidelines although impermissible, but the premature transfer shall be effected by taking approval of the Chief Minister by recording reasons for such transfer. 10. In the instant case, though transfer of the petitioner and posting of fourth respondent is approved by the Chief Minister, no reasons are recorded. The reason for premature transfer that ‘Administration and Public Exigency’ would not be sufficient ant it needs more than that. The observation of the Tribunal that the order is already implemented and it would not interfere with the order of transfer is again opposed to the decision of this Court in T.SUNEEL KUMAR (supra). 11. For the reasons stated above, the following: - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26916-DB WP No. 21138 of 2025 ORDER a) Writ petition is allowed. b) Order dated 08.07.2025 in Application No.2203/2025 is quashed. Consequently, impugned order of transfer dated 09.05.2025 insofar as petitioner and respondent No.4 is quashed. c) Liberty is reserved to respondent Nos.1 to 3 to effect transfer of petitioner strictly in accordance with the existing rules, i.e., the Karnataka Civil Services (Excise Department Officers and Officials Transfer) Rules, 2025. In view of disposal of the writ petition, I.A.No.1/2025 stands disposed of. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE NC CT:bms: List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12