THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS AND A. ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI, OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION, QUASHING THE IMPUGNED INTERIM ORDER DATED 28.04.2026 PASSED IN APPLICATION NO.2417/2026 BY THE KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL (VIDE ANNEXURE-A) WHICH IS UNTENABLE IN LAW AND UNJUSTIFIED AND 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 DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO

ORAL ORDER

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT)

The petitioner who was respondent No.3 before the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal at Bengaluru (for short “Tribunal”) is before this Court, questioning the interim order dated 28.04.2026 in Application No.2417/2026, whereunder, the interim prayer of the applicant/respondent No.3 herein is allowed staying the impugned order of transfer bearing No.¯ÉÆÃE 124 ¸ÉÃ¸É 2026 dated 21.04.2026 (Annexure-A6) insofar as petitioner and respondent No.3 herein while posting the matter on 17.06.2026 for filing reply statement.

2. Heard Sri.Omkar Kambi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.V.Shivareddy, learned AGA for respondents No.1 and 2 as well as Sri.Vijaya Simha Reddy, learned counsel for respondent No.3. Perused the entire writ petition papers.

3. The parties would be referred to as they stood before the Tribunal. The petitioner herein was respondent No.3, whereas respondent No.3 herein was applicant before the Tribunal.

4. The applicant approached the Tribunal questioning the notification dated 21.04.2026, whereunder, respondent No.3 was posted in his place as Assistant Executive Engineer, P.W.D Sub-Division, Hiriyur while handing over services of the applicant to the Water Resources Department, by contending that respondent No.3 is holder of post of Assistant Executive Engineer under Rule 32 of KCSRs and further contending that the applicant has not completed his tenure at Hiriyur. The applicant had also prayed for interim order of stay of the impugned order of transfer dated 21.04.2026.

5. Respondent No.3 had entered caveat before the Tribunal and submitted on the prayer for interim order, that respondent No.3 has assumed charge of the post of Assistant Executive Engineer, P.W.D. Sub-Division, Hiriyur on 27.04.2026 and prayed not to grant any interim prayer.

6. The Tribunal under impugned order observed that mere assumption of charge by signing CTC does not comply the conditions stipulated in Rules 12 and 24 of KCSRs and further observed that the applicant is not relieved so far and the assumption of charge will not give right to the private respondent and stayed the impugned order of transfer dated 21.06.2026 till the next date of hearing, while posting the matter on 17.04.2026.

7. In pursuance of the transfer notification dated 21.04.2026, learned counsel for respondent No.3 submitted that respondent No.3 was relieved by movement order dated 23.04.2026 and he reported to duty at the transferred place i.e., P.W.D. Sub-Division, Hiriyur on 24.04.2026. Further, he submits that as the applicant failed to hand over charge, he sought permission to assume charge and under letter dated 27.04.2026, the Chief Engineer (C & B) (Central) Shivamogga permitted the petitioner to assume charge of the post of Assistant Executive Engineer, P.W.D. Sub-Division, Hiriyur. Accordingly, it is submitted that respondent No.3 assumed charge on 27.04.2026. Further, learned counsel for respondent No.3 would submit that movement order dated 23.04.2026 as well as letter dated 27.04.2026 permitting him to assume charge was made available before the Tribunal by way of a memo. It is his submission that without taking those documents into consideration, the Tribunal granted interim order observing that the applicant is not relieved so far and assumption of charge will not give right to private respondent, which is wholly incorrect. Learned counsel would subm