IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1^ST DAY OF APRIL, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND WRIT PETITION NO. 8809 OF 2026 (S-KSAT)

BETWEEN: R MARUTHI AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, S/O RAMANATHAPPA ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF THE SENIOR ASST. DIRECTOR DEPT. OF INFORMATION AND PUBLIC RELATION SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT SHIVAMOGGA RESIDENCE AT D-31 PWD QUARTERS, BASAVANAGUDI MAIN ROAD SHIVAMOGGA-577201.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. VINAYA KEERTHY M., ADV.)

Digitally signed by NANJUNDACHARI Location: HIGH AND:

COURT OF KARNATAKA

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPT. OF INFORMATION AND PUBLIC RELATION VIKASA SOUDHA DR. B R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE-560001.

2. B DHANANJAY ASST. DIRECTOR OFFICE OF THE SENIOR ASST. DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION AND PUBLIC RELATION, DAVANAGERE DIST.

DAVANAGERE-577001.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. V SHIVAREDDY, AGA FOR R1 SRI R.S. SUBRAHMANYA KAUSHIK, ADV. FOR R2)

THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 10/03/2026 PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE IN APPLICATION NO.3832/2025 (ANNEXURE-A) AND ALLOW THE PETITIONERS APPLICATION NO.3832/2025 AND ETC.

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 K.V. ARAVIND)

Heard Sri. Vinaya Keerthi M, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri. V Shivareddy, learned AGA for respondent No.1 and Sri. R S Subrahmanya Kaushik, learned counsel for respondent No.2.

2. The Applicant in Application No. 3832/2025 is before this Court, impugning the order dated 10.03.2026 passed by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, Bengaluru (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal”).

3. The facts briefly stated are that the applicant was posted at the present place, namely Shivamogga, on 04.07.2020. The petitioner has been elected as Executive Committee Member of the Karnataka State Government Employees Association and is nominated as the Vice-President for the District of Shivamogga, for the term 2024–2029. The petitioner was transferred from Shivamogga to Davanagere in place of respondent No. 2. Aggrieved by the order of transfer dated 22.08.2025, the petitioner filed an application before the Tribunal.

3.1 The Tribunal, under the impugned order, proceeded to reject the application, holding that the transfer was effected with the prior approval of the Hon’ble Chief Minister. The Tribunal further held that the petitioner is not entitled to the benefit of Clause 8(5) of the Transfer Guidelines.

4. Sri. Vinaya Keerthi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner, having been elected as an office bearer for the period 2024–2029, is exempt from transfer under Clause 8(5) of the Transfer Guidelines. It is contended that the impugned order of transfer is contrary to the said Guidelines.

4.1 It is further submitted that the reference to a complaint against the petitioner, as a basis for the transfer, is without any foundation. According to the learned counsel, there is no reference to any such complaint or the nature of the allegations in the file relating to the transfer. It is also contended that, in terms of Clause 8(5) of the Transfer Guidelines, the petitioner, being an office bearer, is not liable to be transferred until the completion of his tenure for the second term.

5. Per contra, Sri. Shiva Reddy, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondent No. 1, submits that a complaint was lodged on 18.05.2024, as evidenced by Annexure-R5. It is contended that, considering the seriousness of the complaint, and pursuant to the recommendation of the District In-charge Minister, the transfer has been effected with the approval of the Hon’ble Chief Minister. It is further submitted that where serious alleg