Karnataka High Court
WP/38506/2025 of SRI K N RAJAPPA Vs THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST (HFF) on 13 July 2026
NC: 2026:KHC:35498-DB WP No. 38506 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION NO.38506 OF 2025 (S-KSAT) BETWEEN: SRI. K.N.RAJAPPA S/O LATE
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JULY, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT
AND
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO
WRIT PETITION NO.38506 OF 2025 (S-KSAT)
BETWEEN:
SRI. K.N.RAJAPPA S/O LATE P.KAMANNA
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
WORKING AS DRFO, BENGALURU NORTH ZONE - 2, GREATER BENGALURU AUTHORITY (GBA)
AMRUTHALLI MAIN ROAD,
BYATARANAYAPURA, BENGALURU - 560092.
R/AT NO.245, 6TH B CROSS,
JAKKUR LAYOUT,
YELAHANKA, BENGALURU - 560064.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. C.M.NAGABUSHANA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR
OF FOREST (HFF)
ARANYA BHAVANA, 18TH CROSS,
MALLESHWARAM, BENGALURU - 03.
2.
THE CONSERVATOR OF FOREST
BENGALURU CIRCLE,
JARAKABANDE FOREST QUARTERS,
KAMMAGONDANAHALLI,
Digitally signed
by G
SHREERAKSHA
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
HC-KAR
BENGALURU - 560015
3.
THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER
GREATER BENGALURU AUTHORITY (GBA)
N.R.SQUARE, BENGALURU - 560002.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. V.SHIVAREDDY, AGA FOR R1 & R2;
SRI. M.A.SUBRAMANI, ADV. FOR R3)
THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF
CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION IN
THE NATURE OF A WRIT QUASHING THE ORDER DATED
17/12/2025 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE KSAT AT BENGALURU IN
A.NO.5001/2025, VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND SET ASIDE THE
IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 13/05/2025 PASSED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT
CONSERVATOR
OF
FOREST,
IN
NO.KFD/GTP/DRFO/136/2025-26, VIDE ANNEXURE-A6 AND
CONSEQUENTIAL
IMPUGNED
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.
ORDER
DATED 04/12/2025 PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT CHIEF COMMISSIONER (GBA), IN NO.B12(5H)PR/E-179513/25-26, VIDE ANNEXURE- A14 ARE ILLEGAL 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
HC-KAR
ORAL ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT)
The petitioner is before this Court aggrieved by interim order dated 17.12.2025 in Application No.5001/2025 passed by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, Bengaluru (for short 'KSAT') whereunder the interim prayer of the petitioner to stay the repatriation was rejected.
2. Heard Sri. C.M.Nagabushana, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. V.Shivareddy, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 2 as well as Sri. M.A.Subramani, learned counsel for respondent No.3. Perused the entire writ petition papers.
3. Learned counsel Sri. C.M.Nagabushana would submit that the petitioner was deputed to work at Greater Bengaluru Authority (GBA) by order of deputation dated 25.09.2019 and under impugned order dated 04.12.2025 (Annexure-A14), the petitioner is repatriated from GBA. Learned counsel would further submit that when he approached this Court by filing the present writ petition questioning refusal of interim order by the KSAT, this Court granted interim prayer
HC-KAR
of the petitioner directing continuation of the petitioner in the same post subject to further orders. Further it is submitted that the petitioner is entrusted with census work. Learned counsel files a memo dated 13.07.2026 enclosing letter dated 20.05.2026 of the State Government to the Commissioner and the concerned Officials of the GBA not to transfer the Officials who are entrusted with census function. Thus, he would pray for allowing the writ petition.
4. Per contra, learned counsel Sri. M.A.Subramani for respondent No.3 brought to the notice of the Court that the petitioner at the time of considering interim prayer has submitted that transfer is in the middle of Academic Year and if he is continued till the end of Academic Year, the petitioner may not even pursue the grievance. Interim order was granted on the said submission and further more he has completed his tenure. Hence, learned counsel for respondent No.3 would pray for dismissal of the writ petition.
5. Learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 2 would support the submission of learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3.
HC-KAR
6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of entire writ petition papers, we are of the view that no interference is called for with the impugned order passed by the Tribunal.
7. Admittedly, the petitioner was deputed to work as Deputy Range Forest Officer at GBA on 25.09.2019. The petitioner has completed more than five years at GBA. The maximum period of deputation would be five years in terms of Rule-50 of the Karnataka Civil Services Rules (KCSR). The petitioner has completed his maximum tenure at GBA. He has no right to continue at GBA and rightly the respondent No.3 repatriated the petitioner under Order dated 04.12.2025. The petitioner at the time of preliminary hearing of the present writ petition had made it clear that if he is continued till the end of Academic Year, he would not pursue his grievance.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo dated 13.07.2026 enclosing letter of the Government to the Commissioner of GBA and concerned Officials, wherein the State has communicated that the Officials who are entrusted with the work of census should not be transferred. It is for the
HC-KAR
State Government to look into such grievance and it is not for the Court since letter is not binding on the Authorities.
9. In view of the above, we are of the view that there is no merit in the writ petition. Accordingly, writ petition stands rejected.
Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE
Sd/- (DR.K.MANMADHA RAO) JUDGE
SMJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8