- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50780-DB WP No. 35490 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH 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. 35490 OF 2025 (S-KSAT) BETWEEN: SRI SHIVANNA R., AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, S/O. RANGAYYA, R/AT. 483/C, HOSABADAAVANE, JYOTHI GOWDANAPURA PANCHAYATH, CHAMARAJANAGARA - 571117. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. DHANANJAY KUMAR.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION, M.S. BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU 560001. 2. THE COMMISSIONER, SCHOOL EDUCATION DEPARTMEN, K.R. CIRCLE, BENGALURU 560001. Digitally Signed by REKHA R Location : High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50780-DB WP No. 35490 of 2025 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR (ADMINISTRATION) SCHOOL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, UDUPI DISTRICT, RAJATHADRI, MANIPAL - 576104. 4. THE BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER, UDUPI ZONE, ZILLA PANCHAYAT, UDUPI - 576101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. V. SHIVAREDDY., AGA) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO a) SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 17.11.2025 PASSED IN APPLICATION No. 4698/2025 BY THE KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, INSOFAR AS IT REJECTS THE PETITIONER'S INTERIM APPLICATION VIDE ANNEXURE-A. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, 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 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50780-DB WP No. 35490 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD) The petitioner is aged 58 years and is in the last leg of his service as a 'Teacher' with a Government Primary School, Udupi Zilla Panchayat, and he is served, as others, with the Transfer Order dated 29.10.2025. The petitioner has called this order in question with the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, Bengaluru [for short, 'the Tribunal'] in Application No.4698/2025 with the request for interim order. The Tribunal, by its order dated 17.11.2025, has observed thus: It reveals that when the applicant was working as a Cluster Resource Person at the Cluster Resource Centre, when he has completed his tenure, his name has been shown in the eligible transfer list of excess teachers. Accordingly, he has participated in the counseling and chosen the place of his choice. Later the impugned order has been passed. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50780-DB WP No. 35490 of 2025 When the applicant was holding the post of CRC, Padubidri, when he has completed his tenure at Padubidri in the cadre of CRC, he has to be transferred only through counseling. Accordingly, the impugned order has been passed. Therefore, we do not find any ground to grant an interim order of stay. 2. Sri Dhananjay Kumar, the learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri V Shivareddy, a learned Additional Government Advocate, who is called upon to accept notice for the respondents, are heard on whether this Court must interfere and grant any protection to the petitioner when his application is pending before the Tribunal for a final decision. 3. Sri Dhananjay Kumar submits that the Tribunal has erred in opining that the petitioner is working as a 'Cluster Resource Person' but the petitioner is working as a 'Teacher', and the learned counsel submits that the petitioner is subjected to transfer notwithstanding the Karnataka State Civil Services [Regulation of Transfer of Teachers] Act, - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50780-DB WP No. 35490 of 2025 2020 [for short, 'the Transfer Act] applicable to the Teachers. The learned counsel submits that in terms of the Section - 10[vi] of the Transfer Act there could be exemption to a 'Teacher' who has crossed fifty five years if that Teacher is a male. Sri V Shivareddy submits that this Court may consider that the petitioner has himself averred in the application that he is working as a 'Cluster Resource Person'. 4. Be these as it may, this Court at this stage, is of the prima facie opinion that if the Transfer Act are applicable to the petitioner and the impugned transfer is in terms thereof, the question whether the petitioner must be extended the benefit of exemption based on age could be considered. As such, there is a case for interference. Hence, on this ground, subject to the Tribunal's final opinion on the application, the following: ORDER [a] The petition is allowed; - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50780-DB WP No. 35490 of 2025 [b] The Tribunal's impugned order dated 17.11.2025 in Application No.4698/2025 is quashed staying the operation of the Transfer Order dated 29.10.2025 issued by the fourth respondent insofar as the petitioner is concerned. [c] This order shall be in force until the final disposal or earlier orders by the Tribunal. The respondents are reserved with liberty to seek early disposal of the application before the Tribunal or further orders based on circumstances that are not considered by this Court. Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE AN/-