1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2020

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR

AND

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

W.P. NO.11000/2020 (S-KSAT)

BETWEEN:

K.S.MURALI

SON OF SHIVASHANKARAIAH

AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS

WORKING AS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

OF EXCISE

CHAMRAJNAGAR DISTRICT

CHAMRAJNAGAR-571 313

...PETITIONER

(BY SRI.P.S.RAJAGOPAL, SR. COUNSEL FOR

SRI.BHAT VISHNU JANARDHANA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY THE ADDITIONAL

CHIEF SECRETARY

DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE (EXCISE)

VIDHANA SOUDHA

BANGALORE-560 001.

2.

THE COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE

2ND FLOOR, TTMC 'A' BLOCK

BMTC BUILDING, SHANTHINAGAR

BANGALORE-560 027.

3.

MADESH

MAJOR

WORKING AS DEPUTY

2

COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE

MYSORE DISTRICT

MYSORE-570 270

...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.SUBRAMANYA, ADDL. ADV. GENERAL FOR

SMT.SHILPA S.GOGI, HCGP FOR R1 & R2

SRI.C.M.NAGABHUSHANA, ADV. FOR C/R3)

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF

THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE

ORDER DATED 23.07.2020 PASSED IN APPLICATION

NO.1777/2020 PASSED BY THE HONBLE KARNATAKA

ADMINISTRATIVE

TRIBUNAL,

BANGALORE,

AS

PER

ANNEXURE-A

AND

CONSEQUENTLY

ALLOW

THE

APPLICATION NO.1777/2020 AND ETC.

THIS W.P. COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING

THIS DAY, ARAVIND KUMAR J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:

O R D E R

Order

passed

by

the

Karnataka

State

Administrative

Tribunal,

Bangalore

in

application

No.1777/2020 dismissing the application filed by the

petitioner, whereunder he questioned the order of his

transfer dated 29.05.2020 (Annexure-A12) has been

affirmed is called in question.

3

2.

Petitioner who was working in Mysore came

to

be

transferred

on

20.02.2019

as

Deputy

Commissioner of Excise, Chamarajnagar District and

was placed of Additional Charge of the post Deputy

Commissioner, Mysore District, Mysore, which was

vacant post and he took charge on the same day i.e.,

01.07.2019. Thereafter, petitioner came to be transferred

from Chamarajnagar to Mysore District, Mysore as

Deputy Commissioner vide Annexure-A3 and he took

charge on the same day. Subsequently, by order dated

29.05.2020 (Annexure-A12) petitioner came to be

transferred to Chamarajanagar District, Chamarajnagar

and third respondent was transferred to the place of

petitioner. Being aggrieved by the same, Application

No.1777/2020 came to be filed by the petitioner. As

observed hereinabove, tribunal has dismissed the said

application on the ground that two inspectors of Excise

department had challenged the same order of transfer

issued on 29.05.2020 after classification of Excise

Districts/

Sub-Divisions/Ranges

by

order

dated

29.05.2020 and same had been rejected and petitioner

4

being placed in the same position cannot claim any right

over the post or the place and as such, dismissed the

application.

3.

We have heard the arguments of Sri.

P.S.Rajagopal, learned Senior counsel appearing on

behalf of Sri.Bhat Vishnu Janardhana for petitioner, Sri.

Subramanya,

learned

Additional

Advocate

General

appearing for State and Sri.C.M.Nagabhushana, learned

Advocate appearing for C/respondent No.3.

4.

It is the contention of Sri.P.S.Rajagopal,

learned Senior counsel appearing for petitioner that

petitioner having been transferred from Chamarajanagar

to Mysore on 12.07.2019 before completion of two years

period without assigning any reason and as such it is

contrary to transfer guidelines. He would also contend

that Government being aware of petitioner having taken

charge as Deputy Commissioner of Excise, Mysore Urban

District on 08.05.2020 and subsequent order dated

09.05.2020 withholding the Official Memorandum dated

08.05.2020 being without jurisdiction and as such, it

5

was liable to be set aside and consequently his transfer

itself was erroneous. He would also submit that only

with

th