- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1142 WP No. 109422 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO. 109422 OF 2025 (S-TR) BETWEEN: MALLIKARJUN GOUD G. N. S/O. G. NARAYANA AGE ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCC: ASSISANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (V), OFFICE OF KAMPLI DIVISION, GESCOM KAMPLI, R/O. D. NO.522, D-1, BEHIND VASAVI SCHOOL, INFANTRY ROAD, CANTONMENT, BALLARI-583104. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MALLIKARJUN GOUD G.N., (PARTY-IN-PERSON) AND: 1. MANAGING DIRECTOR KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LIMITED, CAUVERY BHAWAN, K.G. ROAD, BENGALURU-560020. 2. THE DIRECTOR (ADMINISTRATION AND HUMAN RESOURCE), KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LIMITED, CAUVERY BHAWAN, K.G. ROAD, BENGALURU-560020. 3. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (V), O AND M RURAL DIVISION, GVSKL BALLARI-583132. 4. SHRINIVAS PRASAD K., AGE: MAJOR, OCC: WORKING AS ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (V), H.T. RATING SUB-DIVISION, GESCOM, RAICHUR DISRICT-584101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.S.KAMATE, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3; SRI. RAJASHEKHAR R.GUNJALLI, ADVOCATE FOR R4) MANJANNA E Digitally signed by MANJANNA E Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2026.02.02 10:02:47 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1142 WP No. 109422 of 2025 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI AND QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF TRANSFERRED THE PETITIONER FROM KAMPLI TO ALLIPUR ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 BEARING NO. SANKE.KPTCL/DGMP/MES1 (B58)11/2025 DATED 13.11.2025 SAME IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE- B AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDER THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA ORAL ORDER The petitioner, who appears partly-in-person, has called in question the transfer orders dated 13.11.2025 and 25.11.2025 issued by the Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Ltd. (KPTCL) and the consequential relieving order dated 04.12.2025 produced at Annexures-B, C and E respectively, whereby, the petitioner has been transferred from Kampli to Allipur and thereafter to Munirabad and relieved from the post at Kampli. Brief Facts: 2. The petitioner is serving as an Assistant Executive Engineer (V) under KPTCL/GESCOM and has been in service since the year 2003. Earlier, the petitioner had questioned the transfer order dated 30.07.2024 before this - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1142 WP No. 109422 of 2025 court in W.P. No.104632/2024. By order dated 20.02.2025 (Annexure-A), this Court quashed the said transfer insofar as the petitioner was concerned and issued a specific direction that the petitioner shall be continued at Kampli only upto 29.07.2025. It is not in dispute that the protection granted by this Court in the earlier writ petition was time-bound and not an indefinite interdiction against transfer. After expiry of the said protected period, the respondent-Corporation issued: i. A transfer order dated 13.11.2025 transferring the petitioner from Kampli to Allipur Annexure-B. ii. A subsequent posting order dated 25.11.2025 transferring him from Allipur to Munirabad (Annexure-C) and a relieving order dated 04.12.2025, relieving him from Kampli (Annexure- E). The respondents have also placed on record the duty report dated 12.12.2025, evidencing compliance with the transfer orders. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1142 WP No. 109422 of 2025 3. The petitioner appearing in person contended that: i. The impugned transfer orders violate the transfer guidelines, particularly the minimum tenure norms. ii. The remark regarding vacant post ‘Allipur’ is incorrect. iii. He has already suffered multiple transfers and that the impugned action causes hardship to his family. iv. The respondents have acted in this regard to the earlier order passed in W.P. No.104632/2024. v. That the similarly placed officers have been retained at Ballari / Kampli for long duration amounting to discrimination. vi. Reliance is placed on the service particulars and comparative data produced under Annexure-G. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents would contend that the impugned transfer orders are issued strictly in accordance with the transfer guidelines and administrative exigency of the Corporation. It is submitted - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1142 WP No. 109422 of 2025 that the earlier order passed by this Court in W.P. No.104632/2024 granted only a time-bound protection to the petitioner to continue at Kampli upto a specified date and did not create any vested or indefensible right to remain at the said station thereafter. It is further contended that upon expiry of the said period, the respondents were well within their jurisdiction to affect transfer in the interest of administration. It is contended that the impugned orders are neither punitive nor arbitrary, having been issued by the competent authority, and the relieving order is only a consequential order following from valid transfer, and that no case is made out for interference under Articles 226 or 227 of the Constitution of India. 5. This Court has carefully considered the rival contentions urged by the learned counsel for the parties and the entire material on record, including the earlier order passed by this Court in W.P.No.104632/2024 (Annexure-A), the impugned transfer and posting orders dated 13.11.2025 and 25.11.2025 produced at Annexures-B and C, the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1142 WP No. 109422 of 2025 consequential relieving order dated 04.12.2025 produced at Annexure-E, the service particulars and comparative data relied upon by the petitioner at Annexure-G, and the duty report dated 12.12.2025 placed on record by the respondents. 6. A careful reading of the order dated 22.02.2025 passed in W.P.No.104632/2024, makes it abundantly clear that this Court did not grant a blanket or a permanent protection against transfer. The specific direction in the aforesaid writ petition was that the petitioner shall continue at Kampli only upto 29.07.2025. The said direction was explicit and conditional. Once the said direction lapsed, the employer was fully entitled to exercise its power of transfer subject to law. Therefore, the contention that the impugned transfer violates the earlier order is factually and legally unsustainable. 7. The transfer is an incident of service and unless vitiated by malafides, statutory violation or patent - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1142 WP No. 109422 of 2025 arbitrators, this Court cannot sit an appeal over the administrative decision. The petitioner has not placed any material to establish that the transfer was punitive, passed by an incompetent authority or in violation of any statutory prohibition. The duty report dated 12.12.2025 produced by the respondent further evidences the compliance of the transfer order and its continuity. In view of the above discussion, this Court is of the considered view that the impugned transfer orders are issued after the expiry of the time-bound protection granted earlier. They are supported by administrative exigency and do not suffer from arbitrariness or illegality warranting any interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, this Court pass the following: ORDER i. The writ petition is hereby dismissed. ii. It is however made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on future administrative decisions and the petitioner is at liberty to make - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1142 WP No. 109422 of 2025 representation to the competent authority, if so advised, which shall be considered in accordance with law. Sd/- JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA AT Ct:VH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31