- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40538 WP No. 18918 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI WRIT PETITION NO. 18918 OF 2025 (S-RES) BETWEEN: SRI. NANDISH M S S/O. LATE SURESH. M. N., AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, WAS WORKING AS SECOND DIVISION ASSISTANT, MYSORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, JLB ROAD, MYSORE-570 005, NOW UNDER AN ORDER OF SUSPENSION, RESIDING AT HOUSE NO.335, A AND B BLOCK, RAMAKRISHNA NAGAR, MYSORE-570 023. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SATISH K., ADV.) AND: THE COMMISSIONER MYSORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, Digitally signed by SUNITHA K S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40538 WP No. 18918 of 2025 JLB ROAD, MYSORE-570 005. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. G.B. SHARATH GOWDA., ADV.) THIS WP IS FILED PRAYING TO A) CALL FOR RECORDS FROM THE RESPONDENT IN RESPECT OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 23/12/2024 (ANNEXURE - C) B) ISSUE WRIT OR ORDER QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 23/12/2024 BEARING NO.MAINAPRAA/SIBBANDI (3).P.R.195/2013-14 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT (ANNEXURE C) AND CONSEQUENTLY DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO GRANT ALL CONSEQUENTIAL BENEFITS TO THE PETITIONER, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40538 WP No. 18918 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI ORAL ORDER This petition is filed by the petitioner seeking the following reliefs: 1) "Call for records from the respondent in respect of the impugned order dated 23.12.2024 (Annexure-C); 2) Issue writ or order quashing the impugned order dated 23.12.2024 bearing No.MaiNaPraa/Sibbandi(3).P.R.195/2013-14 passed by the respondent (Annexure-C) and consequently direct the respondent to grant all consequential benefits to the petitioner, in the interest of justice and equity; 3) Pass any other appropriate order as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, including the cost of this writ petition." 2. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this writ petition are as follows: The petitioner is an employee of the respondent- Authority working as a Second Division Assistant. The petitioner visited his house in Dubai where his wife resides for the first time on 14.02.2023 and 26.02.2023. He also - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40538 WP No. 18918 of 2025 visited Dubai between 27.07.2023 an d 31.07.2023. The respondent issued a show cause notice on 30.10.2024 informing the petitioner that he had failed to seek permission from the competent authority prior to his travels overseas. The petitioner has replied to the show cause notice vide reply dated 30.10.2024 i.e., on the very same day and pleaded ignorance of the rule, and requested to condone the lapse. The respondent vide order dated 23.12.2024 placed the petitioner under suspension on the count that he had committed misconduct since he had not taken permission from authority before leaving the country. The petitioner submitted a representation dated 26.03.2025 to withdraw the order of suspension on humanitarian consideration. No action is taken by the respondent either to revoke the order of suspension or to reinstate the petitioner into the service. Meanwhile, the respondent issued an articles of charge on 20.06.2025 alleging the misconduct of the petitioner. The petitioner submitted a representation on - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40538 WP No. 18918 of 2025 23.06.2025 requesting the respondent-Authority to reinstate him into the service since six months have elapsed. The petitioner, aggrieved by the order of suspension dated 23.12.2024 passed by the respondent vide Annexure-C, has filed this writ petition. 3. The respondent filed the statement of objections contending that the order of suspension is not a punishment, however only a step in aid to facilitate fair enquiry. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 23.12.2024, placing him under suspension pending departmental enquiry. It is contended that the grounds urged in the writ petition are meritless, and warrant no interference at the hands of this Court. It is contended that the petitioner is working as a Second Division Assistant, and has travelled abroad without permission from the competent authority. This constitutes grave misconduct. It is contended that a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 30.10.2024. The petitioner replied to the said show cause notice. The respondent, - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40538 WP No. 18918 of 2025 being dissatisfied with the reply submitted by the petitioner, has passed an order of suspension on 23.12.2024 and also issued a charge sheet dated 20.06.2025. Hence, prays to dismiss the writ petition. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, and also the learned counsel for the respondent. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submit that the respondent has passed an impugned order of suspension on 23.12.2024. He submits that, if the departmental inquiry is not commenced against a delinquent government servant or the charge sheet is not filed within a period of six months from the suspension, the competent authority shall decide whether to revoke or continue the suspension of such a government servant, and unless decided and ordered for continuation within this period, the suspension shall be deemed to have been revoked. After the expiry of six months, the respondent has not passed any order for continuation of the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40538 WP No. 18918 of 2025 suspension order or no charge sheet was issued to the petitioner within six months, and no departmental enquiry was conducted within six months from the date of suspension. Hence, he submit that the direction be issued to the respondent to reinstate the petitioner as per Clause (b) of sub-rule (5) of Rule 10 of the Karnataka Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957 (for short 'the Rules, 1957'). Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow the writ petition. 6. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent submit that the petitioner was kept under suspension vide the suspension order dated 23.12.2024. He also submit that the petitioner is in the habit of travelling abroad without seeking the permission of the competent authority. Thus, the action of the petitioner in travelling abroad amounts to misconduct. He submit that the respondent has issued an article of charges on 20.06.2025 and the departmental inquiry is still pending. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to dismiss the writ petition. *Page No.7 retyped and replaced vide chamber order dated 27.10.2025. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40538 WP No. 18918 of 2025 7. Perused the records, and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. 8. It is undisputed that the petitioner is the employee of the respondent, and he was working as a Second Division Assistant. The petitioner travelled abroad without seeking permission of the competent authority. The respondent issued a show cause notice on 30.10.2024 calling upon the petitioner to explain why he has travelled abroad without seeking permission from the competent authority. The petitioner replied to the show cause notice vide reply dated 30.10.2024. The respondent dissatisfied with the explanation offered by the petitioner, issued a suspension order on 23.12.2024. The petitioner has submitted a representation dated 26.03.2025 requesting the respondent to reinstate the petitioner into the service. Meanwhile, the respondent issued an article of charges on 20.06.2025. The petitioner vide letter dated 23.06.2025 requested the respondent to be reinstated i.e., after six - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40538 WP No. 18918 of 2025 months. To consider the case on hand, it is necessary to examine Clause (b) of sub-rule (5) of Rule 10 of the Rules, 1957, reads as under: "10. Suspension.-(1) x x x (5) (a) x x x (b) If departmental inquiry is not commenced against the delinquent Government Servant or charge sheet is not filed in the court within a period of six months from suspension, the competent authority shall decide whether to revoke or continue suspension of such Government Servant and unless decided and ordered for continuation within this period, the suspension shall be deemed to have been revoked i.e., from the date of completion of a period of six months from the date of suspension. Upon such revocation of the order of his suspension, it shall be the duty of the Government Servant to immediately seek order of posting from the Appointing Authority, failing which he shall be deemed to be on unauthorized absence with effect from the date of revocation of the order of his suspension.” (Emphasis supplied) 9. From the perusal of Clause (b) of sub-rule (5) of Rule 10 of the Rules, 1957, if the departmental enquiry is not commenced against the delinquent Government Servant or charge sheet is not filed within a period of six months from the suspension, the Competent Authority, *Page No.9 retyped and replaced vide chamber order dated 27.10.2025. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40538 WP No. 18918 of 2025 shall decide whether to revoke or continue suspension of such Government Servant, and unless decided and ordered for continuation within this period, the suspension shall be deemed to have been revoked. 10. Admittedly, in the instant case, after the expiry of six months, the respondent authority has neither revoked the impugned suspension order nor passed an order for continuing the suspension of the petitioner within six months. In the absence of a revocation or continuation of a suspension order, the suspension shall be deemed to have been revoked by a Clause (b) of sub-rule (5) of Rule 10 of the Rules, 1957. In view of the Provisions and the Rules, 1957, the suspension order is deemed to have been revoked. 11. In view of the above discussion, I proceed to pass the following: *Page No.10 retyped and replaced vide chamber order dated 27.10.2025. - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40538 WP No. 18918 of 2025 ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed-in-part. ii. The respondent is directed to reinstate the petitioner into service within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In view of disposal of the writ petition, I.A.No.1/2025 does not survive for consideration and accordingly, disposed off. Sd/- (ASHOK S.KINAGI) JUDGE SSB