- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14044-DB WP No. 7501 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND WRIT PETITION No. 7501 OF 2026 (S-KSAT) BETWEEN: 1. SHRI R. VINAY KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, S/O M. RAMACHANDRA SWAMY WORKING AS SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, (PRESENTLY WAITING FOR POSTINGS) R/AT FLAT No.D-215, BRIGADE SOLITAIRE APARTMENT, ALANAHALLI LAYOUT, MYSURU-570 011. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VIJAYA KUMAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001. 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, COMMUNICATION AND BUILDING (SOUTH), K.R.CIRCLE, BENGALURU-560 001. Digitally signed by VINUTHA B S Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14044-DB WP No. 7501 of 2026 3. THE HON'BLE LOKAYUKTA, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI V. SHIVAREDDY, AGA FRO R1 & R2; SRI K. PRASANNA SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 17/02/2026 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL IN APPLICATION No.97/2026 IN SO FAR AS IT RELATES TO NON-CONSIDERATION OF THE INTERIM PRAYER IS CONCERNED (VIDE ANNEXURE-A). THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT) The petitioner is before this Court questioning the interim order dated 17.02.2026, whereby the prayer of the petitioner for interim stay of order of entrustment of enquiry dated 27.10.2025 as well as Articles of Charge dated 17.11.2025 is not considered and further time has been granted to the respondents-State to file objection. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14044-DB WP No. 7501 of 2026 2. Heard Sri Vijaya Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri V. Shivareddy, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 2, and Sri K. Prasanna Shetty, learned counsel for respondent No.3. 3. Sri Vijaya Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner approached the Tribunal questioning the Government Order dated 27.10.2025 entrusting the enquiry against the petitioner to the third respondent, as well as the Articles of Charge dated 17.11.2025 (Annexure-A7) issued by the third respondent. In the application, it is stated that the petitioner had prayed for interim stay of both order of entrustment of enquiry as well as Articles of Charge. However, it is submitted that the Tribunal at the first instance on 19.01.2026, after ordering notice to the respondents, posted the application on 17.02.2026 for filing of objection by the respondents. Learned counsel would submit that on 17.02.2026, at the request of the learned counsel appearing for the respondents, time was granted till 12.03.2026 to file objection. It is his submission that if no orders are passed on the interim prayer, the interim prayer - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14044-DB WP No. 7501 of 2026 itself would be frustrated and would become infructuous. Hence, he would pray for considering the interim prayer by this Court. 4. On the other hand, Sri V. Shivareddy, learned Additional Government Advocate would submit that he would instruct the authorities to file objection to the application by 12.03.2026. 5. We have considered the submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 6. It is clear that the Tribunal has not considered the interim prayer of the petitioner for stay of Government Order entrusting the enquiry to the third respondent as well as the Articles of Charge dated 17.11.2025 issued by the third respondent. The Tribunal has also not rejected the interim prayer of the petitioner. The Tribunal has granted sufficient opportunity to the State to file objection. To file objection to the interim prayer granting one or two adjournments would be reasonable, thereafter it would prejudice the case of the petitioner. In the said circumstances, it would be appropriate - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14044-DB WP No. 7501 of 2026 to request and accordingly the Tribunal is requested to consider the interim prayer of the petitioner on 12.03.2026 on its merit in accordance with law whether the State would file objection to the interim prayer or not. 7. With the above observation, writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE DDU List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29