- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:854 WP No. 107122 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO.107122 OF 2025 (S-TR) BETWEEN: SRI. GOPAL SHIVAPPA LAMANI NAYAK, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, OCC. DRIVER CUM CONDUCTOR, NWKRTC, BAGALKOT DIVISION, BAGALKOT-587101. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAVI HEGDE, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, NWKRTC, BAGALKOT DIVISION, DIST. BAGALKOT-587101. 2. THE CHIEF PERSONAL MANAGER, NWKRTC, CENTRAL OFFICE, GOKUL ROAD, HUBBALLI, DIST. DHARWAD-580030. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRASHANTH S.HOSMANI, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR ORDER QUASHING THE DIVISIONAL ESTABLISHMENT ORDER NO.426/2025, BEARING NO.VAA.KA.RA.SAA/BAA.VI/SIBBANDI/ C6/2821/25, DATED 13.09.2025, ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 VIDE ANNEXURE-C, AND AS A SEQUEL DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO CONTINUE HIS SERVICE IN THE PLACE AND POST HELD BY HIM PRIOR TO IMPUGNED ORDER AND ETC.,. Digitally signed by YASHAVANT NARAYANKAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:854 WP No. 107122 of 2025 THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL ORDER The present writ petition is filed seeking the following prayers: “ i) issue a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other writ or order quashing the Divisional Establishment Order No:426/2025, bearing No. Vaa. Ka. Ra. Saa/Baa. Vi/Sibbandi/CR/2821/25, dated 13.09.2025, issued by respondent No.1, vide Annexure-C, and as a sequel, direct the respondents to continue his service in the place and post held by him prior to impugned order. ii) issue any other writ order as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the circumstances of the case including the cost of the present proceedings, in the ends of justice.” 2. The case of the petitioner is that, he had joined the services in the respondent/Corporation as a Trainee Conductor in the year 2006. Thereafter, he has been transferred to Bagalakote Division by order dated 21.05.2007, since then he has been working in Bagalakot Division. The petitioner is a Class-IV employee. On one occasion, the petitioner had returned the i-Phone mobile of the passenger, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:854 WP No. 107122 of 2025 who was left in the bus, in which he was discharging the duty. On other occasion, one passenger had left cash of Rs.60,000/- in the bus, which was kept in small bag and that was also returned to the concerned passenger in front of Department Officials. It is stated that the petitioner has been working in that Bagalakot Division without any remark or not even a single black mark in his career. The petitioner was surprised to see the impugned transfer order passed by respondent No.1 dated 13.09.2025, transferring the petitioner from Bagalakot to Bhatkal Depot of Sirsi Division. The petitioner is deemed to have been relieved on the same day i.e. on 13.09.2025. It is stated that there are school going children and apart from that, the circulars and settlements of the Corporation prohibit the transfer from different Divisions, unless there is such an exigency. It is stated that he has not been served with any of the orders mentioned in the reference made in the order dated 13.09.2025. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there are no such transfer guidelines in place and the respondents have passed the impugned order without even stating, what was the reason for transfer and therefore, the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:854 WP No. 107122 of 2025 same is bereft of any reasons, so also it is not a speaking order. Learned counsel submits that from the same Sirsi Division, 15 employees were transferred and out of which, 13 employees’ transfer order is cancelled by the respondents/Corporation, which shows that the respondents are exercising their power arbitrarily and discriminatively. It is submitted that the impugned order needs to be set-aside. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent/Corporation has filed IA No.1/2026 for vacating interim order stating that the petitioner has been working in the Bagalakot Division for the last 18 years, during this period, he has involved in 9 cases of absenteeism and 12 cases of pilferage. The averment made in the petition that the petitioner has been working in Bagalakot Division without any remark and not even a single black mark in his career, is false. Even though the punishment was imposed upon the petitioner, however, he has failed to correct himself and has continued to commit the default cases. It is stated that to address the issue of shortage of staff in Sirsi Division and with the intention to smoothen the functioning of public service for the purpose of ensuring better service delivery to the public at large and for - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:854 WP No. 107122 of 2025 the purpose of optimal utilization of employee's skills and experience, the petitioner has been transferred to Sirsi Division. It is further stated that the transfer of the petitioner is on administrative grounds, but not a punitive one, which the petition is trying to portray. Further, it is stated that as he has been working at Sirsi Division for the last 18 years, it justifies the transfer of the petitioner. 5. On 25.09.2025, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court had granted an interim order and also permitted the petitioner to continue at the same location that he was serving prior to the issuance of the transfer order. It is submitted that in spite of an order by this Court, the respondents/Corporation have not permitted the petitioner to serve in the same place. 6. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the material on record. The vacating application filed by the respondents states that the transfer is not a punishment. Though it is stated that petitioner was involved in some pilferage and other issues, but according to them, the transfer is not on the ground as a punishment, but on administrative reasons, as there is a requirement of the staff - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:854 WP No. 107122 of 2025 in Sirsi Division. If that is the case of the Corporation, the order impugned before this Court needs to be set-aside on the ground that when other 13 people are transferred to Sirsi and later withdrawn their transfer order by permitting all of them to work in the same place, as they were working earlier, which shows there is no requirement at that division. 7. The order impugned before this Court does not contain any reasons as to why they have transferred the petitioner except stating that ‘on administrative reasons’. Even assuming that there is an administrative reason behind his transfer, the transfer order should contain the reasons and the petitioner cannot be singled out. When the Authority is transferring an employee, there should be some Circulars/Rules in place, so that there would be transparency in the manner, in which the Corporation conducts the affairs. Without there being any Circular, if these kinds of transfers are made, it would not be in the interest of the employee and there will be left remediless. 8. In the considered opinion of this Court, the impugned order passed by the respondent/Corporation is arbitrary without any basis and it is not a speaking order, - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:854 WP No. 107122 of 2025 hence, the same is liable to be set-aside, insofar as the petitioner is concerned. Accordingly, this Court deems it appropriate to pass the following: ORDER i. The writ petition is disposed of by setting aside the Divisional Establishment Order No:426/2025, bearing No. Vaa.Ka.Ra. Saa/Baa.Vi/Sibbandi/CR/2821/25, dated 13.09.2025, issued by respondent No.1, vide Annexure-C. ii. The respondent/Corporation shall formulate the transfer guidelines, even in case of Class-IV employees also. iii. Till such Circulars or transfer guidelines are made, whenever a transfer is made on administrative grounds, the transfer order shall contain the reasons and shall be a speaking order. iv. All I.A.s in this writ petition shall stand closed. Sd/- JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI JTR CT: UMD