- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13437-DB WP No. 3819 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND WRIT PETITION No. 3819 OF 2026 (S-KSAT) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. THEJAVATHI K., W/O MANJUNATHA N., AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, LABOUR OFFICER, TUMAKURU SUB-DIVISION, R/AT MANJUNATHA NILAYA, 5TH B CROSS, KANAKADASA ROAD NEAR TUDA LAYOUT, TUMAKURU-572101. …PETITIONER (BY SRI S. RAJASHEKAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR, VIKASA SOUDHA, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560001, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF LABOUR, DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR, KARMIKA BHAVAN, DAIRY CIRCLE, Digitally signed by VINUTHA B S Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13437-DB WP No. 3819 of 2026 BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BENGALURU-560029. 3. MR. G. IBRAHIM SAB, S/O DODDAGUDA SAB, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, WORKING AS LABOUR OFFICER, KARNATAKA BUILDINGS AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION WORKERS WELFARE BOARD, R/AT MUSAIB APARTMENT, KANNIKA SCHOOL ROAD, MELEKOTE RING ROAD, BEHIND OM SHANTHI ROAD, TUMAKURU-572105. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI V. SHIVAREDDY, AGA FOR R1 & R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ORDER DATED 22/01/2026 PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL AT BENGALURU IN APPLICATION No.4177/2025 VIDE ANNEXURE- A. 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 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13437-DB WP No. 3819 of 2026 ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND) Heard Sri.S. Rajashekar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. V. Shivareddy, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 2. 2. This petition is filed by the respondent No.3 in Application No.4177/2025 impugning the order dated 22.01.2026 passed by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, Bengaluru (for short, “the Tribunal”). 3. The petitioner was appointed as Labour Officer and was posted at Madhugiri Sub-Division. The petitioner was also given additional charge of the post of Labour Officer, Tumkur Sub- Division. The petitioner reported for duty and assumed the additional charge at Tumkuru on 30.09.2023. Subsequently, the petitioner was regularly transferred as Labour Officer, Tumkur Sub-Division on 07.11.2023, and reported to the said post on 10.11.2023. In the year 2024, the probation of the petitioner was declared. 3.1 On 13.06.2025, the petitioner was transferred from Tumkuru Sub-Division to the Karnataka Building and Other - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13437-DB WP No. 3819 of 2026 Construction Workers Welfare Board, Bengaluru, and respondent No.3 was posted in her place. The petitioner challenged the transfer order dated 13.06.2025 before the Tribunal in Application No.3089/2025. During the pendency of the application, on 12.09.2025, the transfer order was modified by continuing the petitioner as Labour Officer, Tumkuru Sub- Division and transferring respondent No.3 as Labour Officer, Karnataka Building and Other Construction Workers Welfare Board, Bengaluru. 3.2 On 15.09.2025, the petitioner reported as Labour Officer, Tumkuru Sub-Division. In view of the modification of the transfer order impugned in Application No.3089/2025, the petitioner, on 15.09.2025, filed a memo seeking withdrawal of the application. 3.3 Challenging the order modifying the transfer dated 12.09.2025, respondent No.3 preferred Application No.4177/2025 before the Tribunal. On 18.09.2025, the Tribunal passed an interim order directing the parties to maintain status quo as on that date. Thereafter, on 25.09.2025, the Tribunal - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13437-DB WP No. 3819 of 2026 passed an interim order staying the operation of the order dated 12.09.2025. 3.4 Challenging the said interim order, the petitioner preferred W.P. No.30035/2025 before this Court. The writ petition came to be disposed of by this Court on 30.09.2025, reserving liberty to the petitioner to agitate all contentions before the Tribunal. 3.5 The petitioner filed a statement of objections in Application No.4177/2025 filed by respondent No.3. The Tribunal, by order on the memo dated 15.09.2025, dismissed Application No.3089/2025 as withdrawn. Thereafter, the petitioner preferred Review Application No.141/2025 seeking review of the order dated 27.10.2025 permitting withdrawal of the application. Subsequently, the Tribunal proceeded to allow Application No.4177/2025 filed by respondent No.3 by setting aside the order dated 12.09.2025. 3.6 Impugning the said order, the petitioner is before this court. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13437-DB WP No. 3819 of 2026 4. Sri. S. Rajashekar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner is holding a Group-B post and is entitled to a minimum tenure of two years as per the Government Order dated 12.05.2025. It is submitted that the Official Memorandum dated 13.06.2025 transferring the petitioner from Tumkuru is premature. 4.1 It is further submitted that the Tribunal, while examining the premature transfer of respondent No.3, has failed to consider that the transfer of the petitioner was also premature and that the petitioner was entitled to a minimum tenure of two years. Learned counsel submits that the Tribunal has failed to take into consideration that, by order dated 12.09.2025, the premature transfer of the petitioner was rectified by continuing the petitioner as Labour Officer, Tumkuru. 4.2 It is contended that the Tribunal, without any basis, proceeded to interfere with the order dated 12.09.2025 on the ground that respondent No.3 is a physically disabled person, and that such consideration is without any basis. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner has preferred a - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13437-DB WP No. 3819 of 2026 review application seeking review of the order of the Tribunal dismissing Application No.3089/2025 as withdrawn. 5. Sri. V. Shivareddy, learned Additional Government Advocate appears for respondent Nos.1 and 2. 6. The dates are not in dispute. The order of the Tribunal is questioned in this petition on the ground that the earlier transfer order dated 13.06.2025 was premature. It is contended that the Tribunal interfered with the order dated 12.09.2025, which had restored the petitioner to Tumkuru, on the ground that the transfer of respondent No.3 was premature. The order dated 12.09.2025 restored the posting of the petitioner to Tumkuru and disturbed the posting of respondent No.3 at Tumkuru. 6.1 When the challenge to the modification of the transfer order dated 12.09.2025 was pending at the instance of respondent No.3, the petitioner chose to withdraw the pending application. By virtue of the interim stay order granted by the Tribunal, respondent No.3 continued as Labour Officer at Bengaluru. The Tribunal, considering that the order dated - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13437-DB WP No. 3819 of 2026 12.09.2025 transferring respondent No.3 to Bengaluru was premature, interfered with and set aside the said order. 6.2 In a petition filed by respondent No.3 challenging his premature transfer, it is not open to the petitioner to contend that her transfer was premature. When the petitioner was transferred prematurely, she had rightly invoked the jurisdiction of the Tribunal; however, the petition was subsequently withdrawn without seeking adjudication on merits, particularly in view of the application filed by respondent No.3 and the interim orders passed therein. 6.3 In the application filed by respondent No.3 raising the issue of premature transfer, it is not open to the petitioner to urge that her transfer was premature. The petitioner had an independent cause of action against her alleged premature transfer, which was initially availed of but later withdrawn. When the petitioner has chosen not to pursue the challenge to her order of transfer on the ground of prematurity, the order of the Tribunal cannot be said to suffer from any infirmity or error warranting interference by this Court. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13437-DB WP No. 3819 of 2026 7. In the light of the above undisputed sequence of events and proceedings, the order of the Tribunal is justified. The present writ petition is devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE VBS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29