Karnataka High Court
WP/25405/2026 of SMT. NAVARATHNAMMA N Vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA on 24 August 2026
CNR: KAHC010564572026 NC: 2026:KHC:45474-DB WP No. 25405 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS AND THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION NO. 25405 OF 2026 (S-KSAT) BETWEEN: SMT.
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS
AND
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO
WRIT PETITION NO. 25405 OF 2026 (S-KSAT)
BETWEEN:
SMT. NAVARATHNAMMA N.
W/O. LATE UMESH O. UPPAR
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
WAS WORKING AS
COMMERCIAL TAX INSPECTOR
OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
OF COMMERCIAL TAXES
LGSTO 66, KIADB BUILDING
14TH CROSS, PEENYA 2ND STAGE
BENGALURU - 560 058
NOW UNDER AN ORDER OF SUSPENSION
RESIDING AT NO.63, 9TH CROSS
NEAR MARAMMA DEVI TEMPLE
NAGASANDRA POST, BAGALAKUNTE
BANGALORE - 560 073.
PHONE NO. 7975603081
EMAIL ID NAVARATHNA222@GMAIL.COM
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI SATISH K., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE
(COMMERCIAL TAX - 2
AND COORDINATION)
REPRESENTED BY ITS
Digitally signed
by G
SHREERAKSHA
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
HC-KAR
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
VIDHANA SOUDHA
BANGALORE 560 001.
2.
THE COMMISSIONER
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES
(KARNATAKA), VTK-1
KALIDASA ROAD, GANDHINAGAR
BANGALORE 560 009.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI V. SHIVA REDDY, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL
FOR RECORDS FROM THE HON’BLE KARNATAKA STATE
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN RESPECT OF THE
IMPUGNED
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
Decisions referred to
In this index
1
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.
ORDER
DATED 14/07/2026 PASSED IN APPLICATION NO.1919/2026 (ANNEXURE-A) AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS and HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO
ORAL ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS)
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a Co-Ordinate Bench of this Court under similar circumstances noticed that Rule 10(5)(b) of the KCS (CCA) Rules, 1957 prescribes that even after amendment, the period of suspension can continue only for six months and
HC-KAR
on the expiry of the said date, the suspension is deemed to have been rescinded at the hands of the respondents. Learned counsel for the petitioner prays for similar order.
2. We have perused the order passed by the Co- ordinate Bench in the case of Sri.Loknath R. vs. The State of Karnataka and another in W.P.No.22677/2024 dated 12.12.2024 wherein, the petitioner therein had approached the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal challenging the order of suspension. Although the application was rejected by the Tribunal, nevertheless before this Court, it was contented that in terms of Rule 10 (5)(b) of the Rules, 1957, the order of suspension is deemed to have been rescinded. The Co-ordinate Bench took note of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Ajay Kumar Choudhary vs. Union of India1 and also noticed that an amendment was brought to the Rules extending the 1 (2015) 7 SCC 291
HC-KAR
minimum period of suspension from three months to six months. However, even after the expiry of the period of six months, the respondent authorities did not pass any order in terms of the provision.
3. In the present case too, the petitioner approached the Tribunal challenging the order of suspension dated 12.02.2026 and the application was rejected on 14.07.2026, at the hands of the Tribunal. However, subsequent to the rejection of the application at the hands of the Tribunal, this writ petition has been filed and in this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking the benefit of the Rule which permits deemed revocation of the order of suspension.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the order of suspension is dated 12.02.2026, the period of six months came to an end on 12.08.2026. Further, in terms of the requirement of the Rule, the
HC-KAR
petitioner has also given a representation on 13.08.2026 seeking postings at the hands of the respondents.
5. Consequently, this petition is disposed of declaring that the petitioner's suspension dated 12.02.2026 came to an end on the evening of 12.08.2026; a direction issues to the respondents to give him posting immediately. Any dispute relating to what should happen to the suspension period, is kept open to workout elsewhere in accordance with law.
Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE
Sd/- (DR.K.MANMADHA RAO) JUDGE
MH/- List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8