THE KARNATAKA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD v. STATE OF KARNATAKA
WP/19985/2022 · 2026-06-10
M G S Kamal
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 21377 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 21377 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27746 WP No. 19985 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO. 19985 OF 2022 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
KARNATAKA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY, NO.49, PARISARA BHAVANA, CHURCH STREET, BANGALORE - 560 001.
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. A. MAHESH CHOWDHARY., ADVOCATE) AND:
1.
STATE OF KARNATAKA, SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VIKAS SOUDHA, BANGALORE - 560 001.
2.
THE PRESIDENT, KARNATAKA STATE SCHEDULED CASTE AND SCHEDULE TRIBE COMMISSION, NO.14/3, NEAR RESERVE BANK,
Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
- 2 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27746 WP No. 19985 of 2022
NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001.
3.
SRI. NATARAJU V, S/O LATE VENKARAYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/AT GEDDALAPALYA VILLAGE, HADONHALLI POST, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL - 561 205. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.MANJUNATHA RAYAPPA, AGA FOR R1;
SRI.C.JAGADISH, ADVOCATE FOR R3;
SRI.MANJUNATH A.C., ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO a) TO ISSUE WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY DIRECTION TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED PROCEEDINGS IN COMPLIANT NO.232/2022 VIDE ANNEXURE - A DATED 2306.2022 BEFORE THE KARNATAKA STATE COMMISSION FOR SCHEDULED CASTE AND THE SCHEDULED TRIBES VIDE ANNEXURE-A ONE BEING WITHOUT JURISDICTION, IS ILLEGAL AND BAD IN THE EYES OF LAW AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL
- 3 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27746 WP No. 19985 of 2022
ORAL ORDER
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.
2. Short grievance of the petitioner is that, having found dereliction and negligence on the part of respondent No.3-employee, a departmental enquiry was initiated, preceded by issuance of suspension Order.
3. Upon the challenge mounted by the respondent No.3 to the suspension Order by filing W.P. No.4921/2022, this Court by order dated 1.7.2022 had set aside the order of suspension. However, had reserved liberty to the petitioner herein to take appropriate steps to ensure non-interference by the respondent No.3 in the departmental proceedings.
4. In the meanwhile, respondent No.3 had approached Karnataka State Commission of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes-Respondent No.2 herein seeking intervention, which led to an order being passed on 09.09.2022 by the said Commission as per Annexure-A1, restraining the petitioner herein from proceeding further in the Departmental Enquiry until disposal of the matter pending before the Commission.
- 4 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27746 WP No. 19985 of 2022
5. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner herein has filed the present petition.
6. This Court vide order dated 06.10.2022, had stayed the operation of the order at Annexure-A1 and all proceedings pursuant to Annexure-A1 before the respondent No.2- Commission.
7. Today, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that departmental enquiry has been completed and respondent No.3 has been found guilty and has been handed over minor punishment. In that view of the matter, he submits that pendency of the proceedings before the Commission has become infructuous, Hence, seeks for allowing of the petition.
8.
Learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.3, at this juncture, submits that, liberty be reserved to the respondent No.3 to avail such remedy as may be permissible under law to redress his grievance in the light of the departmental enquiry culminating in handing over minor punishment to him.
- 5 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27746 WP No. 19985 of 2022
9. The said submission is placed on record.
10. The petition is accordingly allowed. The proceedings before respondent No.2 are quashed as the same has become redundant and infructuous.
Sd/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE
HR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11