IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF APRIL 2021

BEFORE

THE HON9BLE MR.JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT

WRIT PETITION NO.4479/2021 (S-TR)

BETWEEN:

N VENKATESH

S/O LATE SRI NARASAPPA

AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS

WORKING AS ASSESSOR

WARD NO.148, OFFICE OF

ASSISTANT REVENUE OFFICER

KORAMANGALA SUB DIVISION

BANGALORE 560031

SOUTH ZONE (NOW UNDER

ILLEGAL ORDER OF TRANSFER)

AND R/A NO.18, K G LAYOUT

BEHIND S J P POLICE STATION

BANGALORE- 02.

...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. M. SUBRAMANYA BHAT, ADV.)

AND:

1. THE COMMISSIONER

BENGALURU BRUHATH

MAHANAGAR PALIKE

N R SQUARE

BANGALORE- 02.

2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (ADMN)

BENGALURU BRUHATH

MAHANAGAR PALIKE

N R SQUARE,

BANGALORE- 02.

2

3. SRI C S KUMAR

AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS

WORKING AS ASSESSOR

WARD NO.148, OFFICE OF

ASSISTANT REVENUE OFFICER

KORAMANGALA SUB DIVISION

BANGALORE- 560031.

&RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.K.N PUTTEGOWDA, ADV. FOR R1 & R2

SRI. K. SATISH, ADV. FOR R3)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE

CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RELEVANT

RECORDS AND QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 17.02.2021

ISSUED BY THE R2 AND APPROVED BY THE R1, PRODUCED AT

ANNEXURE-D, AS THE SAME ARE ARBITRARY, UNREASONABLE,

ILLEGAL AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL BESIDES BEING VIOLATIVE OF

THE TRANSFER GUIDELINES DATED 19.12.2020, PRODUCED AS

ANNEXURE-C AND ETC.

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 8B9

GROUP THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE THIS DAY, THE COURT

MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

O R D E R

The petitioner, working as Assessor in the respondent-

Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (for short 8the BBMP) is

before this Court challenging the transfer under the

impugned Office Order bearing No.B12(1)PR/423/2020-21

dated 17.02.2021 (Annexure-D) on the ground of premature

transfer.

3

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that

the petitioner was posted to Ward No.148, Koramangala sub-

Division by Office Order dated 12.12.2019 (Annexure-A),

pursuant to which, he reported to duty on 16.12.2019. The

post of Assessor being Group-C post and provided with

minimum of 3 years tenure at a place or posting under

Circular dated 19.12.2020 of the respondent/BBMP, even

before completion of minimum tenure provided to the

petitioner, the respondent-BBMP under Annexure-D dated

17.02.2021 transferred the petitioner from Ward No.148,

Koramangala sub-Division to Kempegowda Nagara sub-

Division, Ward No.118 and posted respondent No.3 in the

place of petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner

contends that the transfer of petitioner and posting of 3^rd

respondent under the impugned Office Order is wholly

premature and further he would submit that the same is

opposed to transfer guidelines vide circular dated 19.12.2020

of respondent-BBMP. Further he would submit that no

reasons are recorded for premature transfer of the petitioner.

4

As such, he prays for quashing the impugned order of

transfer.

3.

Learned counsel Sri.K.Satish for respondent No.3 would

submit that no prejudice is caused to the petitioner, as the

transfer is within the BBMP Limits. Further, he would

submit that the impugned order of transfer is passed in

public interest. Thus, he prays for dismissal of the writ

petition.

4.

Both petitioner as well as respondent No.3 are working

as Assessors in the respondent-BBMP. The petitioner was

posted to Ward No.148, Koramangala sub-Division under

Office Order dated 12.12.2019. Under the impugned order,

the petitioner is transferred from Ward No.148, Koramangala

sub-Division to Ward No.118, Kempegowda Nagara sub-

Division. The transfer is within one year three months. The

petitioner is admittedly provided with three years tenure and

as his transfer is within one year three months from the date

5

of posting him to the present place, the transfer of petitioner

is wholly premature.

5.

The circular dated 19.12.2020 of respondent-BBMP

provides

for

premature

transfer.

But

while

eff