- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35100-DB WP No. 29063 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH 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. 29063 OF 2019 (S-KSAT) BETWEEN: 1. THE KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTHA, REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR, M.S.BUILDING, K.R.CIRCLE, BANGALORE - 560 001. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ASHWIN S HALADY, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPLE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION, 6TH FLOOR, M.S. BUILDING, BANGALORE-560001. 2. SRI. AMARAPPA, S/O LATE SANGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, RETIRED FIRST DIVISIONAL ASSISTANT, O/O THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL MARKETING, RESIDING AT SHARADA NILAYA, 1ST CROSS, SODDAPURA BADAVANE, Digitally signed by VALLI MARIMUTHU Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35100-DB WP No. 29063 of 2019 GANGAVATHI, KOPPAL DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI V. SHIVAREDDY, AGA FOR R1; SMT. AISHWARYA S. ADVOCATE FOR SMT. SHILPA RANI, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL IN APPLICATION No.7007/2018 DATED 29.10.2018. 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 K. V. ARAVIND ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT) The petitioner-Karnataka Lokayukta represented by its Registrar, is before this Court questioning the order dated 29.10.2018 passed by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal at Bengaluru (for short 'the Tribunal') by which, second respondent's Application No.7007/2018 is allowed by quashing the entrustment of enquiry order dated 03.11.2017 as well as Articles of Charge dated 24.08.2018. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35100-DB WP No. 29063 of 2019 2. Heard Sri.Ashwin S. Halady, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri.V.Shivareddy, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.1 and Smt. Aishwarya S., learned counsel for Smt. Shilpa Rani, learned counsel for respondent No.1 and perused the entire writ petition papers. 3. On perusal of the entire material on record, it is seen that second respondent retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.01.2015. On an incident which took place on 19.03.2014, investigation was conducted by the petitioner and report under Section 12(3) of the Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984 was submitted to the first respondent-Government. The first respondent-Government by order dated 03.11.2017, entrusted the enquiry against respondent No.2 to the petitioner-Institution. The Additional Registrar (Enquiries- 09) of the petitioner-Institution issued Articles of Charge on 24.08.2018. The second respondent challenged the said order of entrustment as well as Articles of Charge - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35100-DB WP No. 29063 of 2019 before the Tribunal in Application No.7007/2018. The Tribunal under impugned order, quashed the entrustment order as well as Articles of Charge on the ground of Barred by Rule 214(2)(b) of the Karnataka Civil Services Rules (KCSR). Questioning the said order, the petitioner- Institution is before this Court in this writ petition. 4. Having heard the learned counsels for the parties and on perusal of the entire writ petition papers, we are of the considered opinion that the Tribunal is justified in allowing the application of the second respondent and quashing entrustment order dated 03.11.2017 and Articles of Charge dated 24.08.2018 as barred by Rule 214(2)(b) of KCSR. Admittedly, respondent No.2 retired on 31.01.2015. In respect of an event that took place on 19.03.2014, Articles of Charge came to be issued on 24.08.2018 in pursuance to entrustment order dated 03.11.2017. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35100-DB WP No. 29063 of 2019 5. Rule 214(2)(b) of KCSR reads as follows; "……. a departmental proceedings, if not instituted while the Government servant was in service, whether before his retirement or during his reemployment, (i) shall not be instituted save with the sanction of the Government, (ii) shall not be in respect of any event which took place more than four years before such institution." 6. The word 'institution' has been explained under sub-rule (6) of Rule 214 of KCSR. Sub-rule (6) would state that for the purpose of institution of departmental proceedings, the same shall be deemed to be instituted on the date on which the statement of charges is issued to the Government servant or pensioner. 7. In the instant case, the Articles of Charge is issued on 24.08.2018 in respect of an event which took place on 19.03.2014 which is beyond four years from the date of the incident or event. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35100-DB WP No. 29063 of 2019 8. In the above circumstances, the Tribunal rightly allowed the application as barred by time in terms of Rule 214(2)(b) of KCSR. 9. We don’t find any error or illegality in the order passed by the Tribunal. Accordingly, writ petition stands rejected. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE DDU List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9