Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 85612 (KAR)

THE KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA v. SRI UMESH D. HADAPADA S/O DEVENDRAPPA

WP/108138/2023 · 2025-12-10

Geetha K B, S G Pandit

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17835-DB WP No. 108138 of 2023 C/W WP No. 107144 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S G PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE GEETHA K.B. WRIT PETITION NO. 108138 OF 2023 (S-KAT) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 107144 OF 2023 (S-KAT) IN WP NO. 108138/2023: BETWEEN: 1. THE KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA, M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU 560001. REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA. 2. THE ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR, ENQUIRIES 4, KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA, M.S. BUILDING, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU 560001. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SRINIVAS B. NAIK, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. UMESH D. HADAPADA S/O DEENDRAPPA AGE. 54 YEARS, OCC. ASSISTANT AGRICULTURE OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, TALUK KALAGHATAGI, DIST. DHARWAD. RESIDING AT FLAT NO.44, DHANESHWARI NAGAR, J.S.S. COLLEGE, BACK SIDE DHARWAD, DHARWAD DISTRICT. 2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, Digitally signed by BHARATHI H M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.12.18 11:05:41 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17835-DB WP No. 108138 of 2023 C/W WP No. 107144 of 2023 DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, VIKAS SOUDHA, BENGALURU 560001. 3. THE COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, SHESHADARI ROAD, BENGALURU 560012. 4. THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE, DHARWAD, DISTRICT DHARWAD. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. G.K. HIREGOUDAR, PRL. GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI AND QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 12-11-2021 PASSED BY THE HON’BLE KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL BELAGAVI IN APPLICATION NO.6186/2017 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-A AND CONSEQUENTLY, PASS AN ORDER PERMITTING THE PETITIONER TO CONTINUE THE DEPARTMENTAL ENQUIRY AGAINST THE RESPONDENT NO.1 IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY & ETC. IN WP NO. 107144/2023: BETWEEN: 1. THE KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA, M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU 560001. REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR LOKAYUKTA. 2. THE ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR, ENQUIRIES-4, KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA, M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU 560001. ...PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SRINIVAS B. NAIK, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. UMESH D. HADAPADA S/O DEVENDRAPPA AGE. 54 YEARS, OCC. ASSISTANT AGRICULTURE OFFICER, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17835-DB WP No. 108138 of 2023 C/W WP No. 107144 of 2023 OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR TALUK KALAGHATAGI, DIST. DHARWAD. RESIDING AT FLAT NO.44, DHANESHWARI NAGAR, J.S.S. COLLEGE, BACK SIDE DHARWAD, DHARWAD DISTRICT-580001. 2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, VIKAS SOUDHA, BENGALURU 560001. 3. THE COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, SHESHADARI RAOD, BENGALURU 560012. 4. THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE, DHARWAD, DISTRICT DHARWAD 580007. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. G.K. HIREGOUDAR, PRL. GOVT. ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI AND QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 12/11/2021 PASSED BY THE HON’BLE KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL BELAGAVI IN APPLICATION NO.5262/2017 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-A AND CONSEQUENTLY, PASS AN ORDER PERMITTING THE PETITIONER TO CONTINUE THE DEPARTMENTAL ENQUIRY AGAINST THE RESPONDENT NO.1 IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY & ETC. THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S G PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE GEETHA K.B. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17835-DB WP No. 108138 of 2023 C/W WP No. 107144 of 2023 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S G PANDIT) In both the above writ petitions, the Lokayukta Authorities are before this Court under Article 226 of Constitution of India aggrieved by the order dated 12.11.2021 in Application No. 5262/2017 and Application No.6186/2017 whereunder, the Tribunal quashed the order of Entrustment dated 27.05.2017, 10.08.2017 and Articles of Charge dated 11.08.2017 and remitted the matter to the first respondent-State Government to take appropriate decision in the matter in accordance with law. 2. The parties would be referred in terms of their ranking before the Tribunal. 3. Heard learned counsel Sri.Srinivas B. Naik for petitioners-Lokayukta Authorities, learned Prl.Government Advocate Sri.G.K.Hiregoudar for respondent Nos.2 to 4 and perused the petition papers. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17835-DB WP No. 108138 of 2023 C/W WP No. 107144 of 2023 4. The applicants were before the Tribunal questioning the order of Entrustment of enquiry dated 27.05.2017 and 10.08.2018 and Articles of Charge dated 11.08.2017. The Tribunal on the ground that there is no application of mind by the first respondent while passing the order of Entrustment of enquiry, quashed the orders of Entrustment of enquiry and consequent Articles of Charge and remitted the matter to the first respondent-State Government to take decision in accordance with law. 5. Admittedly, the State Government which is aggrieved, since, there is observation against the State Government that it has not applied its mind has not preferred the writ petition against the impugned order of the Tribunal. Admittedly, the Tribunal has given a definite finding that first respondent-State Government has failed to apply its mind while passing the order of Entrustment of enquiry. If that is so, it is for the State Government to establish application of mind by it, at the time of passing the Entrustment of enquiry order. The petitioners- - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17835-DB WP No. 108138 of 2023 C/W WP No. 107144 of 2023 Lokayukta authorities cannot demonstrate before this Court, the application of mind or otherwise by the State Government. When the Tribunal observes non-application of mind by the State Authorities, the Lokayuktha Authorities would not get locus to question the order before this Court. 6. In that view of the matter, the present writ petitions are not maintainable and the same stands rejected. 7. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioners to proceed in accordance with law i.e. under Section 12(5) of Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984. Sd/- (S G PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (GEETHA K.B.) JUDGE HMB LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 31