SMT.SHWETHA BAI vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55477-DB
WP No. 30766 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010677852026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 6 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT
AND
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
WRIT PETITION NO. 30766 OF 2026 (S-KSAT)
BETWEEN:
SMT.SHWETHA BAI
W/O. KUMAR NAIK M.,
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
WORKING AS CHIEF OFFICER,
TOWN PANCHAYATH, HAROHALLI,
NEAR K.S.R.T.C BUS STAND,
OPPOSITE GOVERNMENT KARNATAKA
PUBLIC SCHOOL, RAMANAGARA,
BANGALORE SOUTH DISTRICT-562 112,
R/AT NO.88/2, DYVASANDRA VILLAGE,
ANEKAL MAIN ROAD, ATTIGUPPE POST,
HAROHALLI TALUK, RAMANAGARA,
BANGALORE SOUTH DISTRICT-562 112.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SATISH K., ADV.)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT,
(MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION-2 AND BOARD),
REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
VIKASA SOUDHA,
BANGALORE - 560 001.
2. THE DIRECTOR,
DIRECTORATE OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION,
TH TH
9 AND 10 FLOOR, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
V. V. TOWERS, BANGALORE 560 001.
Digitally signed by
NANJUNDACHARI
Location: High
Court of
Karnataka
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55477-DB
WP No. 30766 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010677852026
3. SRI. NARASIMHAMURTHY S. D.,
FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,
MAJOR,
WORKING AS OFFICE MANAGER,
DIRECTORATE MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION,
TH TH
9 AND 10 FLOOR, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
V. V. TOWERS, BANGALORE 560 001.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. VIKAS ROJIPURA, AGA FOR R1 & R2
V/O DATED 29.09.2026 SRI MURALIDHARA, ADV. FOR R3)
THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO I) CALL FOR RECORDS FROM
THE KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU
IN RESPECT OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 24/09/2026 PASSED
IN APPLICATION NO. 4333/2026 (ANNEXURE-A) 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
ORAL ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT)
Heard learned counsel Sri.K.Satish for petitioner,
learned Additional Government Advocate Sri.Vikas
Rojipura for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and learned senior
counsel Sri.H.Subramanya Jois for Sri.Muralidhara, learned
counsel for respondent No.3. Perused the entire writ
petition papers.
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55477-DB
WP No. 30766 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010677852026
2. The petitioner, aggrieved by vacating of interim
order of status quo under order dated 24.09.2026 in
Application No.4333/2026 passed by the Karnataka State
Administrative Tribunal at Bengaluru (for short, ‘the
Tribunal’), is before this Court in this writ petition.
3. Learned counsel Sri.Satish.K., for petitioner
would submit that the petitioner is a KMAS Officer
belonging to the Municipal Administration Department. It
is also submitted that respondent No.3 also belongs to
Municipal Administration Department who is holding the
post of Office Manager. It is submitted by learned counsel
Sri.Satish.K., for petitioner that the petitioner has
completed his tenure at the present post at the Town
Panchayath, Harohalli. However, he submits that
respondent No.3 who is non-KMAS Officer could not have
been posted to replace the petitioner. Learned counsel
would submit that the Tribunal initially granted an order of
status quo on 15.09.2026. However, on hearing the
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55477-DB
WP No. 30766 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010677852026
learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned
counsel for respondent No.3, the Tribunal vacated the
order of status quo. Learned counsel Sri.Satish.K., for
petitioner would submit that the Co-ordinate Bench of this
Court in the case of P.G. RAMESH VS. THE STATE OF
KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY AND
OTHERS (ILR 2008 KAR 8) has made it clear that only a
KMAS Officer could replace a KMAS Officer as the Chief
Officer. Therefore, he objects for posting of respondent
No.3 to replace the petitioner at Town Panchayath,
Harohalli.
4. On the other hand, learned senior counsel
Sri.H.Subramanya Jois, by referring to Section 320 of the
Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964 (for short, ‘the Act’),
would submit that the Government has every power to
transfer any officer or servant of the Municipal Council to
the service of any other Municipal Council or of any other
local authority or of any Government Department. Further,
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55477-DB
WP No. 30766 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010677852026
learned senior council also would submit that the
Government could post even Office Superintendent under
Rule 16(ii) of Karnataka Civil Services (General
Recruitment) Rules, 1977 (for short, ‘the Rules’). Thus, it
is submitted that even an Office Superintendent could be
posted as Chief Officer in terms of Section 320 of the Act
and in terms of the Rule 16(ii) of the Rules. Therefore, he
submits that the Tribunal was justified in vacating the
interim order of status quo.
5. Learned Additional Government Advocate
Sri.Vikas Rojipura would submit that within one week from
today, the State would file objections and he would pray
for direction to the Tribunal to dispose of the main
Application itself.
6. As submitted by learned counsel Sri.Satish.K.,
the petitioner has completed his tenure as Chief Officer of
Town Panchayath, Harohalli. However, the question that
has to be considered by the Tribunal is as to whether a
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55477-DB
WP No. 30766 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010677852026
non-KMAS Officer can be posted to replace a KMAS Officer
as Chief Officer, Grade-I. The Tribunal having granted
interim order of status quo on 15.09.2026 ought to have
heard the main Application itself instead of vacating the
interim order of status quo. The grounds or contentions
raised by both the parties are to be considered by the
Tribunal. If the contention raised by respondent No.3 is
considered in this writ petition and answered, nothing
would remain to answer before the Tribunal. It is stated
that by virtue of status quo, the petitioner is continued to
work as Chief Officer, Town Panchayath, Harohalli.
Further, this Court also by interim order dated 29.09.2026
directed the parties to maintain status quo with regard to
their position.
7. Making the interim order of status quo dated
29.09.2026 granted by this Court in the present writ
petition absolute, the present writ petition stands disposed
of with a request to the Tribunal to dispose of the main
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55477-DB
WP No. 30766 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010677852026
Application itself within four weeks from 15.10.2026 and
the Government shall file statement of objections by
15.10.2026.
The observations made in the course of this order or
impugned order shall not influence the Tribunal while
considering the main prayer.
Sd/-
(S.G.PANDIT)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA)
JUDGE
NC
CT:bms
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20