- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26349-DB WP No. 20732 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH 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.20732 OF 2025 (S-KSAT) BETWEEN: SRI. MANJUNATH K. S/O N. KRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, WORKING AS EXECUTIVE OFFICER, AT ANEKAL TALUK, BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT, R./AT NO. 08, SAMRUDDI NILAYA, TALI ROAD, ANEKAL TOWN, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT 562 106. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. T.NARAYANASWAMY, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. RAGHUPATHI M J, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND PANCHAYAT RAJ, M S BUILDING, BENGALURU 560 001. 2. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER BENGALURU URBAN ZILLA PANCHAYATH, BANASHANKARI, BENGALURU DISTRICT, BANGALORE - 560 001. 3. SRI A. N. BAIRAPPA WORKING AS ASSISTANT SECRETARY, Digitally signed by MADHUSHREE H Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26349-DB WP No. 20732 of 2025 ZILLA PANCHAYATH, CHIKKAMAGALURU, CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT - 572 143. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.S.BHAGWAT, SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI. P.V.MANJUNATHA FOR C/R3; SRI. V.SHIVAREDDY, AGA FOR R1 & R2) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER NATURE TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 07/07/2025 IN APPLICATION NO.3042/2025 PASSED BY THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL ANNEXURE-A IN NOT CONSIDERING THE INTERIM RELIEF OF STAY AS SOUGHT FOR BY THE PETITIONER AND CONSEQUENTLY GRANT THE INTERIM RELIEF AS PRAYED FOR BY THE PETITIONER IN APPLICATION NO.3042/2025, ETC THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT) The Petitioner an Executive Officer belonging to Rural Development and Panchayat Raj is before this Court under Article 226 of Constitution of India aggrieved by rejection of interim prayer under order dated 07.07.2025 in Application No.3042/2025 passed by the Karnataka State - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26349-DB WP No. 20732 of 2025 Administrative Tribunal, Bengaluru (for short, ‘the Tribunal). 2. Under transfer notification dated 30.06.2025, the petitioner who was working as an Executive Officer, Taluk Panchayat, Anekal, Bengaluru Urban District is posted as Executive Officer, Taluk Panchayat, Badami, Bagalkot District posting the respondent No.3 in his place. 3. Heard Sri.T.Narayanaswamy, learned counsel for Sri.Raghupathi M.J., learned counsel for the petitioner and learned senior counsel Sri.M.S.Bhagawat for Sri.P.V.Manjunatha, learned counsel for the caveator- respondent No.3 and Sri.V.Shiva Reddy, learned AGA has taken notice for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and perused the entire writ petition papers. 4. Sri.T.Narayanaswamy, learned counsel for the petitioner would mainly contend that the respondent No.3 was posted to Chikkamagalur by notification dated 03.02.2025 and he has not even completed six months of - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26349-DB WP No. 20732 of 2025 service at Chikkamagalur. Moreover, he submits that respondent No.3 is holding the post of Executive Officer under Rule 32 of KCSRs whereas, the petitioner is regular holder of the post of Executive Officer. It is his submission placing reliance on the decisions of the Co-ordinate Bench in Raghurama Shetty vs. The State of Karnataka and another in W.P.No.14393/2012 dated 07.06.2012, Bhoja Raja vs. Hombalaiah and others dated 05.09.2012 in W.P.No.17097/2012 and other writ petitions, that person holding post under Rule 32 of the KCSRs cannot replace a regular holder of the post. 5. On the other hand, Sri.M.S.Bhagwat, learned senior counsel would submit that the respondent No.3 has assumed the charge of post of Executive Officer, Taluk Panchayat, Anekal, in pursuance to the impugned notification dated 30.06.2025 (Annexure - A6). Further, it is submitted that his duty report is accepted by the CEO of Zilla Panchayat, Bangalore Urban District. Thus, he - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26349-DB WP No. 20732 of 2025 submits that taking note of the above fact, Tribunal has rightly granted an order of status quo. 6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the entire writ petition papers, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order dated 07.07.2025 in Application No.3042/2025 rejecting the prayer of the petitioner for stay of the impugned order of transfer dated 30.06.2025. 7. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that a person holding the post under Rule 32 of KCSRs cannot replace regular holder of the post, is to be considered by the Tribunal taking note of the decisions cited by the learned counsel for the petitioner at the time of final disposal. If the said contention is appreciated, at this stage, nothing would remain before the Tribunal for consideration. 8. The Tribunal taking note of the contention of the petitioner as well as taking note of the fact that - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26349-DB WP No. 20732 of 2025 respondent has assumed charge has rightly granted an order of status quo. There is no error or irregularity in the order passed by the Tribunal. Accordingly, writ petition stands rejected. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE MH/- List No.: 1 Sl No.: 48