- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:585 WP No. 105923 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO. 105923 OF 2025 (S-DE) BETWEEN: SRI. CHANDRASHEKAR S/O. PARAMANNA MANAMATTI, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, OCC: EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELE), R/O. #2051, NO. 2051, VANASIRI NAGAR, BEHIND AKASHAVANI PRASARA KENDRA, SATTUR, DHARWAD-580009. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. KARTIK GANACHARI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DIRECTOR (ADMIN AND HR) AND DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY, KPTCL, KAVERI BHAVAN, BENGALURU-560009. 2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KPTCL, KAVERI BHAVAN, BENGALURU-560009. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHIVARAJ P.MUDHOL, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR SUCH OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION, BY QUASHING THE CHARGE MEMO/ARTICLE OF CHARGES DATED 22/11/2024 BEARING NO. KAVIPRANINI/B94/58115(C)2024-25/UNIPPART-1/TECHNICAL VIDE ANNEXURE-A IN SO FAR AS PETITIONER IS CONCERNED, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Digitally signed by GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2026.01.30 10:50:30 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:585 WP No. 105923 of 2025 ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner has called in question the Articles of Charges dated 22.11.2024, issued by the respondent Corporation, seeking quashing of the same on the ground of delay, lack of jurisdiction and alleged violation of the circular dated 25.01.2022. 2. Brief facts of the case: 2.1. The petitioner, while working as Executive Engineer (Ele) at Athani Division, during the period from 30.04.2016 to 19.03.2018, was issued a charge memo dated 22.11.2024, alleging certain irregularities and consequential financial loss to the Corporation. 2.2. The petitioner submitted his reply dated 23.01.2025 and thereafter a further representation dated 03.06.2025. 2.3. Before the disciplinary authority could proceed further, the present writ petition came to be filed - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:585 WP No. 105923 of 2025 seeking quashing of the charge memo at the threshold. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the charge memo is vitiated by inordinate delay. As per the Government Order dated 04.10.2021 adopted by Circular dated 25.01.2022, disciplinary proceedings ought to have been concluded within a stipulated period. It is contended that the petitioner is nearing retirement and pendency of the enquiry is affecting his promotional prospects and, in view of the recovery allegedly made, continuation of the enquiry is unwarranted. 4. Per Contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the charge memo has been issued after due investigation and strictly in accordance with law. That the writ petition is premature as the enquiry is not yet commenced and concluded, and the circular relied upon by the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:585 WP No. 105923 of 2025 petitioner is not statutory in nature and does not nullify the disciplinary proceedings. It is further contended that the petitioner has an effective opportunity to participate in the enquiry and defend himself. 5. Having considered the rival submissions and on perusal of the record, this Court finds that: 5.1. It is a settled principle of law that originally this Court would not interfere with the Charge Memo or Articles of Charges unless the same is shown to be wholly without jurisdiction or patently illegal. No such exceptional circumstance is made out in the present case. 5.2. The allegation pertains to irregularities during the period 2016 - 2018, and the respondent asserts that the Charge Memo is issued after due investigation. Whether the allegations are - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:585 WP No. 105923 of 2025 ultimately proved or not is a matter to be adjudicated only in a departmental enquiry. 5.3. The contention regarding the circular dated 25.01.2022 cannot be accepted at this stage. 5.4. The petitioner has already submitted his replies and representations. The enquiry has not yet culminated in any adverse order. Therefore, the writ petition at this stage is premature. 5.5. The plea of impending retirement or promotional aspects cannot be a ground to scuttle a disciplinary enquiry at the threshold. 6. In view of the above, this Court finds no ground to interfere with the impugned Articles of Charges. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed, declining interference with the Charge Memo dated 22.11.2024. However, it is needless to say that the respondent Corporation shall proceed with the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:585 WP No. 105923 of 2025 disciplinary inquiry expeditiously and conclude the same within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order in accordance with law. Sd/- JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA gab Ct:VH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16