Karnataka High Court
WP/20293/2021 of THE KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA Vs SRI S SANNE GOWDA on 15 September 2026
CNR: KAHC010419842021 NC: 2026:KHC:50130-DB WP No. 20293 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA WRIT PETITION NO. 20293 OF 2021 (S-KSAT) BETWEEN:
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT
AND
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
WRIT PETITION NO. 20293 OF 2021 (S-KSAT)
BETWEEN:
THE KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA
REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR,
M S BUILDING,
DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU-560001.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. K PRASANNA SHETTY, ADV. (THROUGH VC))
AND:
1.
SRI S SANNE GOWDA
S/O SUBBE GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,
ASST. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
PUBLIC WORKS PORTS AND INLAND
WATER TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT,
SUB DIVISION, SULLIA,
DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT,
R/AT SRI RANGALAKSHMI NILAYA,
INDIRANAGAR, SATYAMANGALA
EXTENTION, HASSAN-573201.
2.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
RE. BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
PUBLIC WORKS, PORTS AND INLAND
WATER TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT,
M S BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. S.C. DESHMUKH, AGA FOR R2
SRI DHRUVA KUMARA D. N., ADV. FOR R1)
Digitally signed by
NANJUNDACHARI
Location: High
Court of
Karnataka
HC-KAR
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE
RECORDS IN APPLICATION NO. 1501 OF 2020 ON THE FILE OF THE
HON’BLE
KARNATAKA
STATE
ADMINISTRATIVE
TRIBUNAL,
BANGALORE AND BE PLEASED TO A). ISSUE AN ORDER OR
DIRECTION
OR
A
WRIT
IN
THE
NATURE
OF
CERTIORARI
QUASHING/SET-ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 09.02.2021 PASSED IN
APPLICATION
NO.1501
OF
PASSED
BY
THE
HON’BLE
KARNATAKA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU (ANNEX-B)
AND CONSEQUENTLY AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN
‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT
AND
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT)
The petitioner, Karnataka Lokayukta represented by its Registrar is before this Court, questioning the correctness or otherwise of the order dated 09.02.2021 in Application No.1501/2020 passed by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal at Bengaluru (for short “Tribunal”), whereunder, the order of entrustment of enquiry under Rule 14-A of the Karnataka Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeals) Rules, 1957 (for short “CCA Rules”) dated 17.02.2020 (Annexure-A7) is quashed, with liberty
HC-KAR
to the second respondent-State Government to examine the materials independently as required under Section 12(4) of the Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984 (for short “1984 Act”) and to take a decision in the matter, in accordance with law.
2. Heard learned counsel Sri.K.Prasanna Shetty for petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.2. Perused the entire writ petition papers.
3. Several grounds are urged on behalf of the petitioner-Lokayukta. However, this Court has taken a view that wherever entrustment order is quashed with liberty to the State Government to take fresh decision, the Lokayukta would have no locus to challenge the said order.
4. Admittedly, respondent No.2-State Government has not filed any writ petition, being aggrieved by the impugned order passed by the Tribunal. When the
HC-KAR
Tribunal has found fault with the Government in not applying its mind, the petitioner-Lokayukta has no locus to challenge the said order. It is for the State Government to establish that it had applied its mind while entrusting the enquiry under Government Order dated 17.02.2020 (Annexure-A7). Moreover, if the State Government fails to take action in terms of Section 12(4) of 1984 Act, it would be open for the petitioner-Lokayukta to initiate action under sub-Section (5) of Section 12 of 1984 Act.
5. In that light of the matter, we are not inclined to entertain the present writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition stands rejected.
Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE
Sd/- (DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE
MPK CT:bms