- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36183-DB WP No. 27483 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND WRIT PETITION NO. 27483 OF 2023 (S-KSAT) BETWEEN: SRI. SHIVA PRASAD M S/O LATE MALLAIAH, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, WORKING AS SENIOR MOTOR VEHICLE INSPECTOR, OFFICE OF THE RTO, JAYANAGARA, BENGALURU RESIDENT OF #97/3 F-2, COLORPELLETTE APARTMENT, HBCCS, BASAVESHWARANAGAR MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU-560079. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SUBRAMANI M A.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS Digitally signed by VALLI MARIMUTHU Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36183-DB WP No. 27483 of 2023 PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORT IST FLOOR, BMTC COMPLEX, SHANTHINAGAR, BENGALURU. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.RAVINDRANATH, AGA) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION TO QUASH ORDER DATED 30/10/2023 PASSED BY THE HONBLE KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL IN APPLICATION NO.4526/2023 (ANNEXURE-A) AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36183-DB WP No. 27483 of 2023 ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT) The petitioner, a Senior Motor Vehicle Inspector is before this Court in this writ petition under Articles 226 of the Constitution of India, questioning the order dated 30.10.2023 in Application No.4526/2023 passed by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal at Bengaluru (for short, "Tribunal"), wherein the petitioner's prayer to set aside the endorsement and to direct the respondents to promote the applicants for the post of Assistant Regional Transport Officer (for short, "ARTO") from the date his juniors were promoted, subject to the outcome of Special Case No.33/2012, is rejected. 2. The brief facts of the case are that: The Lokayuktha Police, Mysuru, registered the first information report in Crime No.14/2008 under Section 13(1)(E) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and on the said crime number, a charge sheet was filed on 26.03.2012. It is stated that on - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36183-DB WP No. 27483 of 2023 09.06.2011, the meeting of Departmental Promotion Committee (for short, "DPC") was conducted, wherein the case of the petitioner was considered, and the DPC decided to keep the petitioner’s case for promotion in a sealed cover in view of pendency of the criminal proceedings as stated above. The request of the petitioner to open the sealed cover was rejected by the endorsement dated 09.11.2016. Therefore, the petitioner is said to have filed Application No.11522/2016 before the Tribunal, challenging the said endorsement dated 09.11.2016. The said application came to be dismissed. The petitioner filed W.P.No.5894/2018, and this Court, by order dated 25.06.2019 allowed the writ petition directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the next higher cadre on the basis of the sealed-cover procedure adopted as on 09.06.2011. In terms of the said direction, by Official Memorandum dated 10.10.2019, the petitioner was promoted to the post of Senior Motor Vehicle Inspector from 15.06.2011. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36183-DB WP No. 27483 of 2023 Thereafter, DPC proceedings dated 19.02.2022 were conducted to consider the cases of the eligible Senior Motor Vehicle Inspectors to the cadre of ARTO and in the said DPC, in view of pendency of criminal proceedings against the petitioner, the decision of the DPC was kept in a sealed cover, and juniors of the petitioner were promoted to the post of ARTO on 21.03.2023. The petitioner's request to open the sealed cover under representation dated 10.07.2023 was rejected, and an endorsement dated 19.07.2023 against which the petitioner filed Application No.4526/2023 and the same was dismissed under impugned order dated 30.10.2023. Challenging the said order of the Tribunal, the petitioner is before this Court in this writ petition. 3. Heard Sri.M.A.Subramani, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. B.Ravindranath, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents. Perused the entire writ petition papers. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36183-DB WP No. 27483 of 2023 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the criminal proceedings have been pending against the petitioner for a very long period, and he submits that the charge sheet was filed on 26.03.2012, wherein the prosecution is still in the process of examining witnesses. Learned counsel would submit that presently the prosecution is examining P.W.17 and the criminal case is posted on 08.10.2025 for further cross-examination of P.W.17. Since the trial against the petitioner is pending for more than 12 years, it is prayed to consider the case of the petitioner to open the sealed cover placing reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Punjab and Others Vs. Chaman Lal Goyal reported in (1995) 2 SCC 570. 5. On the other hand, the learned Additional Government Advocate opposes the prayer of the petitioner and submits that the trial is at the fag end. Therefore, he prays for dismissal of the writ petition. However, he submits that on completion of the trial and depending on - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36183-DB WP No. 27483 of 2023 the outcome of the writ petition, the petitioner would be entitled for consideration of promotion. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the entire writ papers, particularly the peculiarity of the present case, we are inclined to direct the respondents to open the sealed cover procedure followed in the case of the petitioner and to give effect to the decision of the DPC dated 19.02.2022 in respect of the petitioner's promotion to the higher cadre of ARTO. 7. Admittedly, Crime No.14/2008 as stated above was registered against the petitioner on 21.10.2008 and the charge sheet was filed on 26.03.2012. The trial has commenced by examination of PW.1 on 14.11.2018 and at present, the trial is at the stage of examination of P.W.17 (C.W.81) i.e., Investigating Officer. The matter is posted to 08.10.2025 for cross-examination of P.W.17. Even after more than 12 years from the date of the charge sheet, the - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36183-DB WP No. 27483 of 2023 trial has not come to an end and there is an inordinate delay in concluding the trial. 8. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Chaman Lal Goyal (supra) in an identical situation has observed that depending on the facts and circumstances of each case, it is for the Court to balance the situation. At paragraph Nos.11 and 12, it has held as follows: "11. The principles to be borne in mind in this behalf have been set out by a Constitution Bench of this Court in A.R.Antulay v. R.S.Nayak & Anr. (1992 (1) S.C.C.225). Though the said case pertained to criminal prosecution, the principles enunciated therein are broadly applicable to a plea of delay in taking the disciplinary proceedings as well. In paragraph 86 of the judgment, this court mentioned the propositions emerging from the several decisions considered therein and observed that "ultimately the court has to balance and weigh the several relevant factors - balancing test or balancing process - and determine in each case whether the right to speedy trial has been denied in a given case". It has also been held that, ordinarily speaking, where the court comes to the conclusion that right to speedy trial of the - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36183-DB WP No. 27483 of 2023 accused has been infringed, the charges, or the conviction, as the case may be, will be quashed. At the same time, it has been observed that that is not the only course open to the court and that in a given case, the nature of the offence and other cir- cumstances may be such that quashing of the proceedings may not be in the interest of Justice.. In such a case, it has been observed, it is open to the court to make such other appropriate order as it finds just and equitable in the circumstance of the case. 12. Applying the balancing process, we are of the opinion that the quashing of charges and of the order appointing enquiry officer was not warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case. It is more appropriate and in the interest of justice as well as in the interest of administration that the enquiry which had proceeded to a large extent be allowed to be completed. At the same time, it is directed that the respondent should be considered forthwith for promotion without reference to and without taking into consideration the charges or the pendency of the said enquiry and if he is found fit for promotion, he should be promoted immediately. Ibis direction is made in the particular facts and circumstances of the case though we are aware that the Rules and practice normally followed in such cases may be different. The promotion so - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36183-DB WP No. 27483 of 2023 made, if any, pending the enquiry shall, however, be subject to review after the conclusion of the enquiry and in the light of the findings in the enquiry. It is also directed that the enquiry against the respondent shall be concluded within eight months from today. The respondent shall cooperate in concluding the enquiry. It is obvious that if the respondent does not so cooperate, it shall be open to the enquiry officer to proceed ex-parte. If the enquiry is not concluded and final orders are not passed within the aforesaid period, the enquiry shall be deemed to have been dropped". 9. Following the law laid down in the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Chaman Lal Goyal (supra) and in view of the fact that the trial has taken more than 12 years from the date of filing of the charge sheet, we pass the following: ORDER (i) The impugned order dated 30.10.2023 in Application No.4526/2023 passed by the Tribunal is set aside, so also the endorsement dated - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36183-DB WP No. 27483 of 2023 19.07.2023 bearing No.¸ÁD/¹§âA¢-01/ªÉʪÀ-108/2023-24 (Annexure-A14) is quashed. (ii) The respondents are directed to open the sealed cover by following the procedure in respect of the petitioner for promotion to the next higher cadre of ARTO in the DPC conducted on 19.02.2022 and give effect to the decision. If the petitioner is eligible for promotion to the cadre of ARTO, the said promotion is subject to the outcome of pending criminal proceedings. Time for compliance is three months. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE GJM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6