- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27705-DB WP No. 4509 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K WRIT PETITION NO. 4509 OF 2026 (S-KSAT) BETWEEN: SRI. B.H.GOVINDE GOWDA S/O SRI.PATEL HUCHEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 84 YEARS, RETIRED SUPERINTENDENT RESIDING AT NO.336, 3RD CROSS, 5TH MAIN, VIJAYANAGAR, 1ST STAGE, MYSORE - 570 017. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHRIDHAR NARAYAN HEGDE.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION AND LITERACY, M.S. BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE COMMISSIONER FOR PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, NEW PUBLIC OFFICES BUILDING, K.R. CIRCLE, BENGALURU – 560 001. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS MANDYA - 571 401. 4. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS MYSORE -570 001. Digitally signed by NANJUNDACHARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27705-DB WP No. 4509 of 2026 5. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER ZILLA PANCHAYATH, MYSORE - 570 001. 6. THE BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER TALUK RANGE, NANJUMALLIGE, MYSORE – 570 004. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. V. SHIVAREDDY AGA FOR R1-R4 & R6) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTIONS OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN APPLICATION NO.29/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE HON’BLE KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU AND ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OF ORDER OR DIRECTION TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE HON’BLE KSAT, BENGALURU DATED 02/11/2023 IN APPLICATION NO.29/2022 VIDE ANNEXURE-C AND 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 RAJESH RAI K ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT) Heard learned counsel Sri.Shridhar Narayan Hegde for petitioner and learned Additional Government Advocate Sri.V. Shiva Reddy for respondents-State. 2. The petitioner was before the Tribunal questioning the Government order bearing No.Er 103 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27705-DB WP No. 4509 of 2026 J¸ïJ¯ï© 2017 ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ dated 06.08.2018, wherein the period of absence of the petitioner from 14.06.1999 to 10.07.2000 was treated as unauthorized absence in terms of Rule 106A of the Karnataka Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957 (for short, ‘CCA Rules’). Under the impugned order dated 02.11.2023 in Application No.29/2022, the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal at Bengaluru (for short, ‘the Tribunal’) rejected the petitioner’s prayer to quash the above said Government order. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this Court. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that earlier, the order of penalty dated 24.05.2003 was the subject matter of Application No.6077/2001 and it is submitted that the Tribunal quashed the said order of penalty with a direction to the Disciplinary Authority to continue the enquiry by examining the witnesses in the manner provided in Rule 11 of the CCA Rules and - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27705-DB WP No. 4509 of 2026 thereafter a report was directed to be forwarded to the Government to pass appropriate order. However, learned counsel Sri.Shridhar Narayan Hegde for petitioner would submit that no fresh enquiry was conducted. As such, the petitioner approached the Tribunal in Application No.7356/2005 praying to consider the representations dated 16.08.2004 and 07.02.2015 and to grant consequential benefits. The Tribunal by its order dated 29.07.2016 disposed of the application with a direction to the Government to consider the representations and to decide either to drop or to take a decision on the representations for sanction of leave from 14.06.1999 to 10.07.2000. However, learned counsel would submit that the respondents passed impugned order treating the period between 14.06.1999 to 10.07.2000 as unauthorized absence under Rule 106A of CCA Rules. The said order was the subject matter of the application before the Tribunal. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27705-DB WP No. 4509 of 2026 4. When the matter was taken up for preliminary hearing, learned Additional Government Advocate was directed to take notice for respondents and to get instructions as to whether in pursuance of the order dated 03.06.2003 in Application No.6077/2001, enquiry has proceeded further and to make his submission. Learned Additional Government Advocate has filed a memo dated 16.04.2026 enclosing documents to say that further enquiry was conducted and the petitioner remained absent before the Enquiry Officer and based on enquiry report, order was passed on 10.02.2005 itself, treating the period as unauthorized absence under Rule 106A of CCA Rules. 5. In view of the said order, learned counsel appearing for both the parties would submit that the writ petition would not survive for consideration and it is for the petitioner to challenge the said order before the Tribunal. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27705-DB WP No. 4509 of 2026 6. The above submission of the learned counsel appearing for the parties is taken on record. 7. In view of the above submission, present writ petition would no more survive for consideration and accordingly, stands disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to challenge the order dated 10.02.2005 said to have been passed subsequent to further enquiry. 8. All contentions of the parties are left open. 9. If any benefit is still due to the petitioner, it is open for the petitioner to make a representation and if representation is made, we are sure respondents would consider the same in accordance with law. SD/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE SD/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE NC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11