Karnataka High Court
WP/21051/2026 of SRI H R SURESH Vs THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY on 13 July 2026
NC: 2026:KHC:35440-DB WP No. 21051 of 2026 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. 21051 OF 2026 (S-KSAT) BETWEEN: SRI H R SURESH AGED ABOUT 56
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. 21051 OF 2026 (S-KSAT)
BETWEEN:
SRI H R SURESH
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
S/O LATE CHIKKARAMEGOWDA
WORKING AS DEPUTY DIRECTOR
DEPARTMENT OF WOMEN AND
CHILD DEVELOPMENT,
CHAMARAJNAGAR - 571 313
R/AT C/O RUQUSANA AMEER
WIFE OF ASLAM SHARIF
PWD COLONY, NEAR SP OFFICE
OPPOSITE TO OLD MANONIDHI
INSTITUTE OF NURSING
CHAMARAJANAGAR TALUK
AND DISTRICT -571 313.
PERMANENTLY RESIDING AT
NO.2061/1, 2ND CROSS
SUBASHANAGAR,
MANDYA CITY -571 401.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. R SUBRAMANYA, SR. COUNSEL FOR
SMT. KEERTHI REDDY, ADV.)
AND:
1.
THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA
DEPARTMENT OF WOMEN AND CHILD
Digitally signed by
NANJUNDACHARI
Location: High
Court of
Karnataka
HC-KAR
DEVELOPMENT AND EMPOWERMENT OF
DIFFERENTLY ABLED SENIOR CITIZENS
GATE NO.3, 1ST FLOOR, M S BUILDING
BENGALURU- 560 001.
2.
THE DEPUTY SECRETARY
GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA
DEPARTMENT OF WOMEN AND
CHILD DEVELOPMENT AND
EMPOWERMENT OF DIFFERENTLY
ABLED SENIOR CITIZENS GATE NO.3,
1ST FLOOR, M S BUILDING
BENGALURU- 560 001.
3.
THE UNDER- SECRETARY
GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA-2
DEPARTMENT OF WOMEN AND
CHILD DEVELOPMENT AND
EMPOWERMENT OF DIFFERENTLY
ABLED SENIOR CITIZENS GATE NO.3,
1ST FLOOR, M S BUILDING
BENGALURU - 560 001.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. V SHIVAREDDY, AGA)
THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A) CALL FOR RECORDS
IN APPLICATION NO.2917/2026 ON THE FILE OF KARNATAKA
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU; B) ISSUE A WRIT IN THE
NATURE OF CERTIORARI, WRIT OR DIRECTION BY QUASHING THE
ORDER DATED 01/07/2026 PASSED IN APPLICATION NO.2917/2026
VIDE ANNEXURE-A ON THE FILE OF KARNATAKA ADMINISTRATIVE
TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, 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
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 is before this Court questioning order dated 01.07.2026 in Application No.2917/2026 passed by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal at Bengaluru (for short, ‘the Tribunal’), whereunder the petitioner’s prayer to stay the order of suspension dated 12.06.2026 (Anexure-A8) is rejected.
2. Heard learned counsel Sri.R.Subramanya for Smt.Keerthi Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Government Advocate Sri.V.Shiva Reddy for respondents. Perused the entire writ petition papers.
3. Learned counsel Sri.R.Subramanya for petitioner would submit that the petitioner is subjected to transfer and he has challenged his order of transfer before the Tribunal, whereunder the order of status quo is
HC-KAR
operating in favour of the petitioner and against the respondents. Further, learned counsel would submit that to favour one of the officials, on certain false allegations, the petitioner is kept under suspension on 12.06.2026 (Annexure-A8). Learned counsel would submit that those allegations are false and baseless and created only to keep the petitioner under suspension so that posting could be provided to Smt.B.Manjula who is a lower cadre officer. Thus, he would submit that the Tribunal failed to appreciate the prima-facie case made out by the petitioner and refused to stay the suspension of the petitioner.
4. Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate Sri.V.Shiva Reddy would submit that the petitioner was kept under suspension not for any other reason but for certain allegations and complaints received against the petitioner. He submits that it is not a case for interim order of stay, as the petitioner has not made out prima-facie case. Hence, he prays for dismissal of the writ petition.
HC-KAR
5. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusal of the entire writ petition papers, we are not inclined to interfere with the order passed by the Tribunal, rejecting petitioner’s prayer to stay the order of suspension.
6. We have perused the order of suspension. The order of suspension is passed taking into consideration the complaints received against the petitioner and also taking note of the charge memo issued under show cause notice dated 24.03.2026 (Annexure-A9). The suspension is not merely on the ground that the petitioner has challenged his transfer before the Tribunal, but on the ground of allegation in the complaint and pending enquiry.
7. At this stage, it may not be appropriate for us to go into the allegations against the petitioner. On cumulative reading of the entire material on record, we are of the considered opinion that the petitioner has not made out prima-facie case for interim order and there is
HC-KAR
no reason to disagree with the order passed by the Tribunal and the findings recorded by the Tribunal. Accordingly, writ petition stands rejected.
8. All contentions of the parties are left open and without being influenced by the observations made in this order, the Tribunal shall consider the Application on merits.
Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE
Sd/- (DR.K.MANMADHA RAO) JUDGE
NC CT:bms List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17