- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52598-DB WP No. 35250 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF WRIT PETITION NO. 35250 OF 2025 (S-KSAT) BETWEEN: SRI. BANGARAPPA B.R., S/O SRI RUDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, WORKING AS ARMED POLICE CONSTABLE - 217, OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT ARMED RESERVE, NEAR MADAKARI CIRCLE, CHITRADURGA- 577 501, R/AT DOOR NO. 7, POLICE BAR LINE QUARTERS, CHURCH EXTENSION, K BLOCK, CHITRADURGA - 577 501. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. N. SHESHADRI, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SAGAR V. SHASTRI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001. Digitally Signed by REKHA R Location : High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52598-DB WP No. 35250 of 2025 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE AND INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, NRUPATUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001. 3. THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, EASTERN RANGE, DAVANAGERE - 577 001. 4. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT, CHITRADURGA - 570 501. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. V. SHIVAREDDY, AGA) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION, QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 27.03.2025 PASSED BY THE HONBLE KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE IN APPLICATION NO. 5074/2024 AS PER ANNEXURE-C TO THIS WRIT PETITION AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52598-DB WP No. 35250 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF) The unsuccessful applicant in the Application No.5074/2024, before the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore ['Tribunal' for short], is before us under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, calling in question the order dated 27.03.2025, dismissing the application and declining to quash the endorsement impugned in the application and further relief. 2. The parties are referred to as per the rankings before the Tribunal. 3. A brief factual matrix leading to filing of this petition are as under: The applicant was appointed as Police Constable in Dakshina Kannada District on 06.09.2002. Subsequently, on his request he was transferred to Chitradurga District on 04.02.2008, with a condition that he would forego the seniority. After completion of 10 years of service, a request was made for a Time Bound Advancement which was rejected by the Department/ Government. The rejection - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52598-DB WP No. 35250 of 2025 was called in question in Application Nos.1976 and 1977/2015. The Tribunal allowed those applications directing the fourth respondent to consider the claim of the applicant for the benefit of 10 years Time Bound Advancement. In compliance of the order passed by the Tribunal, the applicant was admitted for Time Bound Advancement and his pay was fixed for 10 years and 15 years time bound respectively. 4. When the matter stood the applicant made a representation for admitting him for the 20 years Time Bound Advancement, which comes to be rejected by the fourth respondent on the ground that the applicant though was promoted in the year 2018, had voluntarily foregone the promotion. In these circumstances, he is not entitled for 20 years Time Bound Advancement. An appeal comes to be filed against the order passed by the third respondent resulting in rejection, confirming the endorsement issued. 5. Aggrieved by both the issuance of endorsement and the order in appeal vide Annexure-A9 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52598-DB WP No. 35250 of 2025 and Annexure-A11 dated 28.12.2022 and 16.03.2023, respectively, the applicant was before the Tribunal in Application No.5074/2024, contending that he is entitled for Time Bound Advancement for 20 years as a legitimate right, since he is continuing in the very same post from the date of his appointment. 6. The respondents accepting notice opposed the application on the premise that, as per the Government order dated 09.05.2002, the applicant is not entitled for 20 years Time Bound Advancement, since he has voluntarily foregone his promotion (Annexure-R1). On three occasions the fourth respondent vide order dated 16.08.2019, 08.03.2021 and 25.08.2022, was given promotion under the standing order No.1008 to ANF Unit. However, the applicant on his own requested that he is not willing to get a promotion as an Armed Head Constable (as per Annexure-R5). Based on his request, the promotion orders stated above have been cancelled in terms of the Government Notification dated 22.05.2002. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52598-DB WP No. 35250 of 2025 7. The Tribunal after considering the rival submissions of both the parties, was of the opinion that in terms of the Government orders stated supra, despite the applicant being offered with promotion by 3 orders stated supra, he has not opted for the promotion and requested that he is not willing to accept the Armed Head Constable promotion. 8. In terms of the Government order dated 09.05.2002, the applicant is not entitled for a Time Bound Advancement, since he has foregone his promotion before he was eligible to get a Time Bound Advancement for 20 years. Having observed so, the Tribunal has come to the conclusion that the applicant has not made out any case to interfere in the endorsement issued and the order confirming the same, accordingly dismissed the application. It is this order passed by the Tribunal that is called in question in this writ petition. 9. Heard Sri.N.Sheshadri, learned counsel appearing for petitioner and Sri. V.Shivareddy, learned - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52598-DB WP No. 35250 of 2025 Additional Government Advocate for the respondents, perused the entire writ petition papers. 10. Sri. N.Sheshadri, reiterating the very same grounds taken before the Tribunal invited our attention to Annexure-A7, to contend that the promotion accorded to the applicant was on deputation for a period of two years and the said promotion is a temporary one, subject to the outcome of cases pending before the Tribunal and the Hon'ble Apex Court. In these circumstances, the applicant has requested the third respondent that he is not willing to get a promotion. Since the applicant was not admitted to a promotion in the ordinary course, he is entitled for 20 years Time Bound Advancement. 11. Having perused the Annexure-A7, we are not inclined to accept the contentions raised by Sri. N.Sheshadri. What is stated in the order is that the appellant and others are eligible for the promotion from Armed Police Constable to Armed Head Constable, but for a period of two years, in view of pending matters before the Tribunal and the Hon'ble Apex Court. Once the - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52598-DB WP No. 35250 of 2025 applicant was shown as eligible for promotion, on his voluntary request to forego his promotion, he is not eligible for the 20 years Time Bound Advancement before the completion of 20 years and as such, he is not entitled for 20 years Time Bound Advancement. 12. We find no infirmities, which warrant any interference in the order passed by the Tribunal. The petition sans merits and is accordingly, rejected. Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE PK List No.: 2 Sl No.: 20 ct-vn