MR. KUTUBUDDIN S/O IMANSAB vs THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER/DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18524
WP No. 109058 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020201772026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD
TH
DATED THIS THE 12 DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF
WRIT PETITION NO.109058 OF 2026 (S-KSRTC)
BETWEEN:
MR. KUTUBUDDIN S/O. IMANSAB,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, OCC. DRIVER CUM CONDUCTOR,
PRESENTLY ON LIGHTER JOB, K.K.R.T.C.,
KOPPAL DEPOT, KOPPAL DIVISION, 583231.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. RAVI HEGDE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER/DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY,
KKRTC, KOPPAL DIVISION, KOPPAL-583231.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. PRASHANT HOSAMANI, ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO A) ISSUE WRIT IN
Digitally signed by
THEJAS KUMAR N
Location: High
Court of
Karnataka,
Dharwad Bench
THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR ORDER
QUASHING THE SUSPENSION ORDER DATED 16.06.2026 BEARING
NO. KAA.KA.RA.SAA/KO.VI/SHI.SHA/740/2026/2258/2026, VIDE
ANNEXURE-C, PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT, AND B) CONSEQUENT
UPON QUASHING THE AFORESAID ORDER AS A SEQUEL ISSUE WRIT
OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT TO PUT BACK THE
PETITIONER INTO SERVICE IN THE LIGHTER JOB AS PER THE OFFICE
ORDER DATED 1.7.2026 BEARING NO.
KAA.KA.RA.SAA/KO.VI/SIBBANDI/C-5/1020/2026 PASSED BY
RESPONDENT BY ANNEXURE-D, AND C) ISSUE ANY OTHER WRIT OR
ORDER AS THIS HON’BLE COURT MAY DEEM FIT IN CIRCUMSTANCES
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18524
WP No. 109058 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020201772026
OF THE CASE INCLUDING THE COST OF THE PRESENT
PROCEEDINGS, IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FRESH MATTERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF
ORAL ORDER
The captioned Writ Petition is filed seeking following
reliefs:
A) Issue Writ in the nature of Certiorari or any
other writ or order quashing the Suspension
order dated 16.06.2026 bearing No.
KAA.KA.RA.SAA/ KO.VI/ SHI.SHA/ 740/2026/
2258/2026, vide Annexure-C, passed by the
respondent, and
B) Consequent upon quashing the aforesaid order
as a sequel issue Writ of Mandamus directing
the Respondent to put back the Petitioner into
service in the lighter job as per the office order
dated 01.07.2026 bearing No.KAA.KA.RA.SAA/
KO.VI/ SIBBANDI/ C-5/ 1020/2026 passed by
the respondent vide Annexure-D, and
C) Issue any other writ or order as this Hon’ble
Court may deem fit in circumstances of the case
including the cost of the present proceedings, in
the ends of justice.
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18524
WP No. 109058 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020201772026
2. Heard, Sri.Vinay Kumar Bhat, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of Sri.Ravi Hegde, learned counsel for
the petitioner and Sri.Prashanth Hosamani, learned
counsel appearing for the respondent Corporation.
3. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was kept
under suspension vide order dated 16.06.2026. By this
time, he is under suspension nearly for a period of five
months. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of AJAY
KUMAR CHOUDHARY VS. UNION OF INDIA,
1
THROUGH ITS SECRETARY , at Paragraph No.14 of the
Judgment held as under:
14. We, therefore, direct that the currency of
a Suspension Order should not extend beyond
three months if within this period the
Memorandum of Charges/Chargesheet is not
served on the delinquent officer/employee; if the
Memorandum of Charges/Chargesheet is served a
reasoned order must be passed for the extension
of the suspension. As in the case in hand, the
Government is free to transfer the concerned
person to any Department in any of its offices
within or outside the State so as to sever any local
1
Civil Appeal No.1912/2015, disposed of on 16.02.2015
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18524
WP No. 109058 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020201772026
or personal contact that he may have and which
he may misuse for obstructing the investigation
against him. The Government may also prohibit
him from contacting any person, or handling
records and documents till the stage of his having
to prepare his defence. We think this will
adequately safeguard the universally recognized
principle of human dignity and the right to a
speedy trial and shall also preserve the interest of
the Government in the prosecution. We recognize
that previous Constitution Benches have been
reluctant to quash proceedings on the grounds of
delay, and to set time limits to their duration.
However, the imposition of a limit on the period of
suspension has not been discussed in prior case
law, and would not be contrary to the interests of
justice. Furthermore, the direction of the Central
Vigilance Commission that pending a criminal
investigation departmental proceedings are to be
held in abeyance stands superseded in view of the
stand adopted by us.
4. In terms of the Judgment of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court, the currency of the Suspension Order
should not extend more than three months, if within this
period the Memorandum of charges/ Charge-sheet is not
served on the delinquent officer/ employee; if the
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18524
WP No. 109058 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020201772026
Memorandum of Charges/ Charge-sheet is served a
reasoned order must be passed for the extension of the
suspension. In the case on hand, the Charge-sheet came
to be issued on 28.09.2026 (Annexure-F). The charge-
sheet issued is obviously beyond the period of three
months and there is no further order forthcoming in
respect of extension of suspension, with a reasoned order
subsequent to issuance of charge-sheet.
5. Learned counsel Sri.Prashanth Hosamani, with
all fairness on instruction, submits that, the charge-sheet
has been issued subsequent to completion of three months
and there is no order extending the period of suspension.
However, with equal fairness, he submits that the second
prayer sought in the Writ Petition may not be granted
since the charges leveled against the petitioner are very
serious in nature and he cannot be permitted to continue
in the same posting.
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18524
WP No. 109058 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020201772026
6. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of AJAY
KUMAR CHOUDHARY (supra), has clearly held that the
Government/ employer is free to transfer the concerned
employee to any Department in any of its offices within or
outside the State so as to sever any local or personal
contact that the employee may have and which he may
misuse for obstructing the investigation against him.
7. In view of the same, the suspension order
dated 16.06.2026 vide Annexure-C is set-aside. The
Corporation is directed to reinstate the petitioner in the
lighter job, however not in the very same place, but in any
other place, within the Depot or the Division.
8. It is made clear that, providing lighter job is
subject to the Review by the Medical Board and the order
on the same. Till that day, the petitioner shall be
continued in the lighter job, in any other place, within the
Depot or the Division.
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18524
WP No. 109058 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020201772026
9. With the above observation, the Writ Petition is
disposed of .
Sd/-
(T.M.NADAF)
JUDGE
TKN
CT: UMD
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9