- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33172-DB WP No. 19913 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JULY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K WRIT PETITION NO. 19913 OF 2026 (S-KSAT) BETWEEN: SRI. DALESH AL S/O. LATE SRI LAKSHMANE GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, RANGE FOREST OFFICER, DEPARTMENT OF FOREST, PRESENTLY WORKING AS RANGE FOREST OFFICER, BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, BANGALORE – 560 020. R/AT. NO.779, 21ST CROSS, JNANABHARATHI 2ND STAGE, MARIYAPPANAPALYA, BANGALORE – 560 079. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. C.M. NAGABUSHANA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FOREST ECOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENT, M.S. BUILDING, BANGALORE – 560 001. Digitally signed by NANJUNDACHARI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33172-DB WP No. 19913 of 2026 2. THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST, AND (HEAD OF FOREST FORCE), ARANYABHAVANA, MALLESHWARAM, 18TH CROSS, BANAGLORE – 560 003. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. V.SHIVAREDDY, AGA) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH/CALL FOR RECORDS PERTAINING TO THE IMPUGNED OFFICE ORDER NO.B2/CEV/CR-02/2026-27 E-OFFICE NO.KFD/HOFF/B2 (ENQ)/28/2026-LEGAL-KFD. OFFICE ORDER NO.28/2026-27, PASSED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT (ANNEXURE-A6) AND SET-ASIDE THE SAME AND TO CONTINUE THE APPLICANT AS RANGE FOREST OFFICER, BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY WITH ALL CONSEQUENTIAL BENEFITS AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, 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) Petitioner, a Range Forest Officer of the second respondent department is before this Court aggrieved by order dated 25.06.2026 in Application No.2909/2026 passed by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal at Bengaluru (for short, ‘the Tribunal’) rejecting his prayer to - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33172-DB WP No. 19913 of 2026 stay the officer order dated 16.06.2026, transferring the petitioner from the post of Range Forest Officer, Bengaluru Development Authority (for short, ‘BDA’) to the post of Range Forest Officer, Legal and ICT, Deputy Conservator of Forest office, Kolar Division, Kolar. 2. Heard learned counsel Sri.C.M.Nagabhushana for petitioner and learned Additional Government Advocate Sri.V.Shivareddy for respondents. Perused the entire writ petition papers. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner reported to duty at BDA on 04.10.2024. While working as Range Forest Officer, BDA, a search was conducted by the Lokayukta police and crime No.11/2026 was registered under Sections 13(1)(b) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Consequently, the Lokayukta police recommended to the second respondent to shift the lien of the petitioner from the present place and based on the said recommendation, second - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33172-DB WP No. 19913 of 2026 respondent issued office order dated 13.06.2026 transferring the petitioner from BDA, Bengaluru to Kolar Division, Kolar. Learned counsel would submit that the question of tampering witness would not arise since the allegation does not relate to the act done by the petitioner during his official duty. Further, learned counsel would submit that second respondent without applying its mind, mechanically, based on the recommendation of the Lokayukta police, issued the impugned order. Therefore, he submits that the petitioner has made out prima facie case for grant of interim order of stay of the office order dated 16.06.2026. 4. Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate, Sri.V.Shivareddy for respondents would support the order passed by the Tribunal and submits that the respondents, instead of keeping the petitioner under suspension, transferred him from Bengaluru to Kolar so as to enable fair investigation. Thus, he would pray for dismissal of the writ petition. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33172-DB WP No. 19913 of 2026 5. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusal of the entire writ petition papers, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Tribunal. The grounds urged by the petitioner are to be examined by the Tribunal at the time of final disposal. However, the Tribunal has rightly observed by placing reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER VS. ASHOK KUMAR AGGARWAL [(2013) 16 SCC 147] that instead of keeping the petitioner under suspension, he might have been transferred. 6. Learned Additional Government Advocate would submit that respondents would file objections within two weeks before the Tribunal. If objections are filed, the Tribunal shall endeavor to dispose of the application early. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33172-DB WP No. 19913 of 2026 7. With the above, writ petition stands disposed of. All contentions of the parties are left open. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE NC CT:RK List No.: 2 Sl No.: 4