- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35207-DB RP No. 33 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K REVIEW PETITION NO.33 OF 2026 BETWEEN: BASAVRAJU N. S/O LATE NANJAIAH AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS OCC: A.E.E RAJARAJESHWARINAGAR SUB DIVISION B.B.M.P, BENGALURU-560098 …PETITIONER (BY SMT. VIJAYA M.N., ADV. FOR SMT. ARCHANA MURTHY, ADV.) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT, VIKASSOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. BRUHUTH BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, N.R. SQUARE, BENGALURU -560002 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF COMMISSIONER Digitally signed by PAVITHRA N Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35207-DB RP No. 33 of 2026 3. KARNATAKA POWER CORPORATION LIMITED SHAKTHI BHAVAN, NO.82, RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU-01 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR 4. THE CHIEF ENGINEER (OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE ) KARNATAKA POWER CORPORATION LTD. SHAKTHI BHAVAN RACE CORUSE ROAD BENGALURU 01 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. KHAMROZ KHAN, AGA FOR R1) THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 114 R/W ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF CPC 1908, PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS REVIEW PETITION BY SETTING THE ORDER OF THIS COURT DATED 25.09.2025 IN WA NO.120/2024 IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35207-DB RP No. 33 of 2026 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN) Smt. Vijaya M.N., learned proxy counsel appearing for Smt. Archana Murthy, learned counsel for the review petitioner, submits that Smt. Archana Murthy, the arguing counsel, is unwell. 2. We notice that the only ground raised in this review petition is to the effect that the review petitioner had filed a representation before the respondent which has not been considered. It is also stated that respondent No.2 did not relieve the review petitioner from the duty which is the reason why he could not join the parent department. It is stated that this aspect has not been considered by this Court. 3. We have considered the contentions advanced in the review petition. We have also perused the orders passed. We notice that specific orders have been passed by this Court requiring the review petitioner to rejoin duty in the parent department. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35207-DB RP No. 33 of 2026 4. The submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent- Organization that the respondent did not require the services of the review petitioner was also placed on record. It was on account of the refusal on the part of the review petitioner to rejoin duty in spite of directions issued by this Court that the matter was considered on merits and was disposed of. 5. In the above view of the matter, we find no grounds whatsoever raised to review the findings in the judgment under review. The review petition therefore fails and same is accordingly, dismissed. Sd/- (ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE Sd/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE PN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7