- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32627 WP No. 15001 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI M WRIT PETITION NO. 15001 OF 2026 (S-KSRTC) BETWEEN: SHARANAPPA, S/O. BASAVANTHA RAO, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/AT NO.61, 2ND CROSS, 3RD MAIN, LAKSHMAN NAGAR, VISHWANEEDAM POST, BENGALURU-560 091. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. BASAVARAJU M.C., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR B.M.T.C., CENTRAL OFFICES, K.H. ROAD, SHANTHI NAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 027. 2. THE SENIOR DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER AND DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY, B.M.T.C., EAST-WEST ZONE, SHANTHI NAGARA, BENGALURU-560 027 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. RENUKA H.R., ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS. Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32627 WP No. 15001 of 2026 THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER Sri.M.C.Basavaraju., counsel for the petitioner and Smt.H.R.Renuka, counsel for the respondents appeared in person. 2. The suspension order is challenged in this writ petition on several grounds, as detailed in the memorandum of writ petition. 3. Counsel for the respective parties presented their arguments. Counsel for the respondent submits that the suspension order was passed by exercising power under Regulation 21 of the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) Servants (Conduct and Discipline) Regulations, 1971. It is further submitted that Regulation 30 of the said Regulations provides for filing an appeal against the order of suspension. Stating that there exists an alternate remedy, counsel contends that the petitioner has hurriedly approached this Court without availing the same. Accordingly, it is urged that the writ petition is devoid of merit and liable to be dismissed. 4. I have heard the contentions advanced and carefully perused the writ papers. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32627 WP No. 15001 of 2026 5. The petitioner has asserted that no alternate efficacious remedy is available, and hence he has approached this Court. However, an appeal lies before the Appellate Authority against the suspension order. Moreover, suspension being an interim measure and not punitive in nature, this Court ordinarily refrains from interference unless the order is wholly illegal or exceptional circumstances are demonstrated. The petitioner is expected to exhaust the alternate remedy. The petitioner is at liberty to approach the appellate authority within two weeks from receipt of certified copy of this order. The writ petition is devoid of merit and consequently, the writ petition stands dismissed. 6. In view of the dismissal of the writ petition, the interim order granted by this Court, if any, stands discharged. Consequently, the pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of. SD/- (JYOTI M) JUDGE SS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 47