IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND WRIT PETITION No. 932 OF 2025 (S-KSAT)

BETWEEN:

1. SRI ISMAIL SAHEB SHIRAHATTI, S/O RAJESAHEB, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, WAITING FOR POSTING, DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE 560001, PERMANENTLY RESIDING AT PLOT No.74, R. N. SHETTY ROAD, SAVANUR LAYOUT, GOKUL ROAD, HUBBALLI 580025.

Digitally signed by VALLI …PETITIONER MARIMUTHU Location: H IGH (BY SRI SATISH K., ADVOCATE)

COURT OF KARNATAKA AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE 560001.

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI REUBEN JACOB, AAG A/W SMT. B. SUKANYA BALIGA, AGA)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 09/01/2025 PASSED IN APPLICATION No.4137/2024 BY THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE (ANNEXURE-

A) ETC.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS 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, Karnataka Administrative Service (Junior Scale) Officer, is before this Court under Articles 226 of the Constitution of India questioning the correctness or otherwise of the order dated 09.01.2025 in Application No.4137/2024 passed by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, Bengaluru (for short 'Tribunal') whereby, petitioner's challenge to the order dated 14.08.2024 (Annexure-A8) ordering further enquiry under the provisions of Rule 11A(1) of the Karnataka Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957 [for short 'KCS (CCA) Rules, 1957'], is rejected.

2. Brief facts which are necessary are that, the petitioner was issued with Articles of Charge dated 06.12.2016 (Annexure-A3) under Rule 11 of KCS (CCA) Rules, 1957, alleging payment of compensation to ineligible farmers and also paying compensation in excess of award. The Enquiry Officer, appointed to enquire into the charges, submitted report on 02.11.2018 holding that the charges against the petitioner are not proved. In the said enquiry, it is stated that witnesses- PWs.1 to 9 were examined. The Disciplinary Authority-State Government, on receipt of enquiry report, in exercise of its power under Rule 11A(1) of KCS (CCA) Rules, 1957, ordered for re-enquiry by order dated 17.08.2021 (Annexure-A5). Questioning the Government Order dated 17.08.2021, the petitioner was before the Tribunal in Application No.10951/2021. The Tribunal by its order dated 28.03.2022, set aside the order of re-enquiry dated 17.08.2021 and remanded the matter to the Disciplinary Authority to re- consider in the light of the observations made in the course of Tribunal's order. On re-consideration of the matter, the State Government by order dated 23.01.2023 ordered de novo enquiry i.e. further enquiry in terms of Rule 11A(1) of KCS (CCA) Rules, 1957. The Enquiry Officer, on 31.03.2024, submitted report holding that the charges are not proved. It is stated that no witnesses were examined on behalf of the Disciplinary Authority since the Presenting Officer remained absent. On receipt of the said enquiry report, the Disciplinary Authority-State Government under order dated 14.08.2024 rejecting the said enquiry report ordered for further enquiry as no witnesses were examined. The said order dated 14.08.2024 was the subject matter of Application No.4137/2024 before the Tribunal. The Tribunal under the impugned order rejected the petitioner's application. Questioning the said order of the Tribunal as well as the Government Order dated 14.08.2024 ordering further enquiry, the petitioner is before this Court in this writ petition.

3. This Court, by interim order dated 21.01.2025, stayed the impugned order of the Tribunal da