2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 38837
THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
ASHOK S.KINAGI
SRI SHABBIR AHMED – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
WP 20962/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI WRIT PETITION NO. 20962 OF 2022 (S-RES)
BETWEEN:
SRI SHABBIR AHMED S/O LATE ABDUL JABBAR AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS PRESENTLY WORKING AS OFFICE MANAGER CUM COMMITTEE SECRETARY TUMKUR CITY CORPORATION TOWN HALL, TUMKUR 572101 …PETITIONER Digit ally signed by (BY SRI. NAGARAJAPPA A., ADVOCATE)
SUNITHA K S Location:
HIGH COURT AND:
OF KARNATAKA
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT VIKASA SOUDHA DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE 560 001
2. THE DIRECTOR OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION
9TH FLOOR, DR. VISHWESHWARAIAH TOWER, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE 560 001.
3. THE COMMISSIONER TUMKUR CITY CORPORATION TOWN HALL TUMKUR 572101 (RESPONDENT No.3 IS DELETED VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 24.09.2025)
…RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. B. SUKANYA BALIGA AGA A/W SRI. T.P. SRINIVASA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 V/O DATED 24.09.2025 R3 IS DELETED FROM ARRAY OF RESPONDENT R2 SERVED)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE ALONG WITH ARTICLE OF CHARGE VIDE ANNX-1 TO 4 DTD 16.07.2022 ISSUED BY THE R-1 VIDE ANNX-F.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI
ORAL ORDER
The petitioner filed this writ petition seeking for following reliefs:
"(a) issue an order or direction or writ in the nature of writ of certiorari quashing the show cause notice along with Article of charges (Annexure-1 to 4) dated 16.7.2022 in No.Na.Aa.E/16/Tu.Ma.Pa /2018 issued by the 1st respondent marked at Annexure-F.
(b) issue any order or orders as deems fit and proper including the cost of the proceedings in the interest of justice and equity."
2. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this writ petition are as follows:
2.1. The petitioner was appointed as a Second Division Assistant in 2002 and posted in the respondent- Department at Town Panchayat, Pavagada and thereafter, he was transferred to City Corporation, Tumkur in 2012 and he was promoted as a First Division Assistant (FDA) in 2016. During the period of service as an FDA at City Corporation, Tumkur, a resolution was passed by the City Corporation, Tumkur, for 2015-16 regarding calling for tender for gas connection and supply of stove and cylinder through an agency called B.R.Indane Agency. The supply of said stove and cylinder and also gas connection is an object invoked pursuant to a circular issued by the Government on 30.07.2015 for the purpose of extending the financial assistance to the depressed class of society i.e., scheduled castes, scheduled tribes and OBC. Thereafter, the City Corporation, Tumkur invited quotation by way of paper publication dated 18.01.2016. Respondent No.3 issued a comparative chart of persons who have quoted the tender and the amount quoted which is fair and proper as per the Corporation. Accordingly, a comparative chart of tender as well as the work order was issued to B.R.Indane Gas service. All of a sudden, respondent No.1 issued a show-cause notice alleging that there is a dereliction of duty on the part of the petitioner and others in inviting a tender as per the Karnataka Transparency and Public Procurement Act, 1999, instead of calling a tender by way of quotation. The said show- cause notice was issued after lapse of nearly seven years along with the article of charges to initiate an enquiry under the Karnataka Civil Services (CCA) Rules, 1957. The petitioner submitted a reply to the article of charges on 17.08.2022 and has taken a specific stand that the said benefit was extended to the SC and ST, and as per the circular, it is a financial benefit and not inviting tender for disposal of the property, nor utilizing the said fund for roads or drainages as the circular itself contemplates Sahaya Dhana. The petitioner, aggrieved by the issuance of article of charges against him, filed thi