- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3079 WP No. 1249 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 1249 OF 2026 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: M/S OBJECT TECHNOLOGIES HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.12/1, MATRUSHREE, 25TH CROSS 6TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR BENGALURU 560 070. REPRESNTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER AND DULY AUTHORISED SIGNATORY MR A NAGARA S/O LATE ANANTHRAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. GOUTHAM S BHARADWAJ., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. ANAND P.,ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3079 WP No. 1249 of 2026 AND: 1. DEPARTMENT OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY AND FISHERIES VIKASA SOUDHA, 4TH FLOOR, AMBEDKAR VEEDI, BENGALURU-560001. REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY. 2. THE COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY AND VETERINARY SERVICE, PASHU BHAVANA, HEBBALA, BENGALURU-560024. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.MILIND DANGE., AGA) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 03.01.2026 BEARING NO. AAPAMSAM/C- 5/HOGU.VIVA-01/2025-26 WHEREBY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 TERMINATED THE CONTRACT ENTERED INTO WITH THE PETITIONER IN RELATION TO THE RECRUITMENT OF 1033 D- - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3079 WP No. 1249 of 2026 GROUP WORKERS IN THE 15 DISTRICTS OF KARNATAKA ANNX-A. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD ORAL ORDER The petitioner is aggrieved by the Office Order dated 03.01.2026 [Annexure-A] issued on behalf of the second respondent. The Office Order reads that all the orders issued to the petitioner to avail the services of outsourced manpower cancelled and all services offered by the petitioner must cease within ninety days. 2. Sri Goutham S. Bharadwaj, the learned Counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner has commenced proceedings in COM.O.S.No.743/2025 on the file of the LXXXVI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3079 WP No. 1249 of 2026 [for short, 'the commercial Court'] for recovery of the monies payable alleging breach of contract along with an interim application for temporary injunction against termination of the petitioner's contract and that though the commercial Court had granted interim order initially, it has vacated such interim order by its order dated 11.12.2025. The learned counsel submits that the petitioner proposes to avail the appellate remedy against that order but the second respondent, taking advantage of such order, could not have issued the impugned Office Order only because the commercial Court has rejected the petitioner's application. The learned counsel proposes to elaborate on the petitioner's grievance relying upon contractual terms and the alleged failure to follow due process. 3. When called upon to secure instructions, Sri.Millind Dange, the learned Additional Government Advocate, on instructions from the officers present, - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3079 WP No. 1249 of 2026 submits that the impugned Office Order dated 03.01.2026, though style as an order, is actually intended to be a notice to the petitioner to show cause why the contract must not be terminated. The learned Additional Government Advocate submits that this Court could dispose of the petition reading the impugned Office Order dated 03.01.2026 as a Show Cause Notice to the petitioner with liberty to the petitioner to file reply showing cause against the proposed action leaving open all contentions to be considered by the second respondent. 4. Sri Goutham S. Bharadwaj, in rejoinder, submits that though the petition could be disposed of in the afore terms, this Court must observe that the respondents must not invite tenders calling for bids from others for the services offered by the petitioner lest there is prejudgment affecting the livelihood of more than thousand and odd who are engaged by the petitioner for the different services. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:3079 WP No. 1249 of 2026 5. This Court is of the view that the impugned order dated 03.01.2026 must indeed be read as a Show Cause Notice which extends to the petitioner an opportunity to file reply and justify why the orders in its favour must not be cancelled, and that any decision on such reply must be subject to the outcome in the appeal that the petitioner proposes to file against the commercial Court's order dated 11.12.2025. The petition stands disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE SA ct:sr