- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31901-DB WP No. 13974 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND WRIT PETITION NO. 13974 OF 2025 (S-KSAT) BETWEEN: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE M S BUILDING BENGALURU-560001. 2. THE REGIONAL COMMISSIONER BANGALORE DIVISION II FLOOR, BMTC COMPLEX SHANTHINAGAR BENGALURU-560027. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU DISTRICT BENGALURU-560001. 4. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER MADHUGIRI SUB DIVISION MADHUGIRI-572132. 5. THE TAHSILDAR BENGALURU SOUTHTALUK KANDAYA BHAVAN K G ROAD BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK-560009. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. V SHIVAREDDY, AGA) Digitally signed by MARIGANGAIAH PREMAKUMARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31901-DB WP No. 13974 of 2025 AND: 1. MRS. L TEJAVATHI D/O LINGAPPA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, SECOND DIVISION ASSISTANT O/O THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU DISTRICT BENGALURU-560001 R/AT NO.4/21, IV MAIN GANESHA BLOCK, SULTANPALYA, R T NAGAR POST BENGALURU-560032. 2. SRI M KRISHNAMURTHY WORKING AS SDA OFFICE OF THE TAHASILDAR, ANEKAL TALUK OFFICE BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT BANGALORE-562106. 3. SRI VASANTH KUMAR WORKING AS SDA OFFICE OF THE TAHASILDAR YELAHANKA TALUK OFFICE, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT BENGALURU-560064. 4. SRI G PRADEEP WORKING AS SDA OFFICE OF THE TAHASILDAR YELAHANKA TALUK OFFICE BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT BENGALURU-560064. 5. SRI H S CHANDRASHEKAR WORKING AS SDA/VILLAGE ACCOUNTANT, GOLLAHALLI CIRCLE, KENGERI HOBLI, OFFICE OF THE TAHSILDAR KENGERI, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT BENGALURU-560064. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. A.C. NAGARJUN, ADV. FOR SRI D.S. SUDHANVA, ADV. FOR C/R1) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31901-DB WP No. 13974 of 2025 THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS; B) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT ORDER OR DIRECTION TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 03.06.2022 (ANNEXURE-A) IN A.NO-9238/2018 PASSED BY THE KSAT BENGALURU AND DROP THE CONTEMPT PETITION. 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 K. V. ARAVIND ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT) The State Authorities are before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India assailing the order dated 03.06.2022 in Application No.9238/2018 passed by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal at Bengaluru (for short, ‘the Tribunal’), allowing respondent No.1’s application quashing the endorsement dated 30.12.2017 with a direction to consider the case of the respondent No.1’s application for seniority by considering the date mentioned under order dated 08.02.2013 and include her - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31901-DB WP No. 13974 of 2025 name in the appropriate place in the seniority list and extend all the benefits. 2. Heard learned Additional Government Advocate Sri.V.Shivareddy for petitioners and learned counsel Sri.A.C.Nagarjun for Sri.D.S.Sudhanva, learned counsel for respondent No.1. Perused the entire writ petition papers. 3. Learned Additional Government Advocate Sri.V.Shivareddy would submit that though respondent No.1 was transferred under Rule 6 of the Karnataka Government Servants (Seniority) Rules, 1957 (for short, ‘1957 Rules’) from one unit to another unit under order dated 17.09.2012, she reported to duty only on 17.01.2014. Therefore, the petitioner – State is right in assigning the seniority to the respondent No.1 from 17.01.2014. Learned Additional Government Advocate would submit that though the respondent No.1 was transferred on 17.09.2012 as there was no vacancy of Second Division Assistant in the Bengaluru Urban District - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31901-DB WP No. 13974 of 2025 Revenue Department, she was deputed to work at the State Election Commission where she worked from 08.02.2013 to 17.01.2014. As such, she would not be entitled for seniority for the said period and further he submits that the respondent No.1 would be entitled for counting her service for seniority only from 17.01.2014. Thus, learned Additional Government Advocate prays for allowing the writ petition. 4. Per contra, learned counsel Sri.A.C.Nagarjun for respondent No.1 would support the order passed by the Tribunal and further submits that in terms of order dated 17.09.2012, the petitioner reported to duty on 08.02.2013 and as there was no vacancy, the respondent No.1 was given posting at Karnataka Election Commission. Soon after the vacancy arose, the respondent No.1 was posted back. Therefore, for the fault of the petitioners, the respondent No.1 cannot be made to suffer. However, it is submitted that respondent No.1 would be entitled to count her service for the purpose of seniority from 08.02.2013 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31901-DB WP No. 13974 of 2025 from the date on which she reported to duty. Thus, learned counsel would pray for treating the said period as period spent on duty and prays for dismissal of the writ petition. 5. The respondent No.1 is a Second Division Assistant belonging to Revenue Department. Her request for transfer to another unit i.e., Bengaluru Urban District was considered and order dated 17.09.2012 (Annexure-A1) was passed. Since the transfer of the respondent No.1 is at her request, the petitioner would be entitled for counting of seniority from the date the Respondent No.1 reports to duty. 6. In the instant case, in pursuance to Transfer Order dated 17.09.2012, the respondent No.1 was not provided proper posting, as there was no vacancy in the post of Second Division Assistant. Rather, the respondent No.1 was deputed to the Karnataka State Election Commission, where she reported to duty 08.02.2013. The - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31901-DB WP No. 13974 of 2025 respondent No.1 worked at Karnataka State Election Commission until 17.01.2014 on which date after relieving herself, she reported to duty on transfer i.e., at Bengaluru Urban District. The respondent No.1 was provided proper posting only on 17.01.2014 (Annexure-A13) on arousal of the vacancy. In the above circumstances, the respondent No.1 was not in a position to report to duty as she was not provided re-posting in view of the fact of non-availability of vacancy of Second Division Assistant. When the respondent No.1 was provided re-posting under order dated 17.01.2014, she reported to duty. For the mistake or fault of the petitioners in transferring, without verifying the vacancy position, the respondent No.1 cannot be made to suffer. The respondent No.1 based on her original transfer i.e., 17.09.2012, reported to duty on 08.02.2013. Therefore, the Tribunal is justified in directing to count the seniority of the respondent No.1 from 08.02.2013. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31901-DB WP No. 13974 of 2025 7. We do not find any error or illegality in the order passed by the Tribunal. There is no merit in the writ petition and accordingly writ petition stands rejected. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE NC CT:bms List No.: 1 Sl No.: 38