THE KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA vs B. S PATIL (BASANAGOUDA SHARANAPPAGOUDA PATIL) AND ANR

Court
Karnataka High Court

- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10887-DB
WP No. 201799 of 2021
CNR: KAHC030276062021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
TH
DATED THIS THE 5 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMANYA RANGARAO
WRIT PETITION NO.201799 OF 2021 (S-KAT)
BETWEEN:
THE KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA,
REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR,
M.S. BUILDING, BANGALORE-01.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI SUBHASH MALLAPUR, SPL.PP)
AND:
1. B.S. PATIL
(BASANAGOUDA SHARANAPPAGOUDA PATIL)
S/O SHARANAPPAGOUDA PATIL,
AGE: 63 YEARS, RETD. TALUKA EXTENSION
OFFICER, R/O. H.NO.9-52/2,
BASAVESHWAR NAGAR, SHAHAPUR,
YADGIR-585 201.
Digitally signed by
SHIVALEELA D UDAGI
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
BACKWARD CLASSES WELFARE DEPARTMENT,
ST
1 FLOOR, VIKASA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-01.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SHIVAKUMAR MALIPATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SMT. MAYA T.R., AGA FOR R2)

- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10887-DB
WP No. 201799 of 2021
CNR: KAHC030276062021
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO
A) ISSUE A WRIT IN NATURE OF CERTIORARI AND QUASH THE
ORDER DATED 20.09.2019 PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA STATE
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL AT KALABURAGI IN APPLICATION
NO.20017/2019 VIDE ANNEXURE-B. B) ISSUE ANY OTHER
WRIT ORDER OR DIRECTION AS THIS HON’BLE COURT DEEMS
FIT UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCE OF THE CASE AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRL. HEARING IN ‘B’
GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMANYA RANGARAO
ORAL ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI)
The petitioner aggrieved by the order dated 20.09.2019
passed in Application No.20017/2019 by the Karnataka State
Administrative Tribunal, Kalaburagi (for short, ‘the Tribunal’),
vide Annexure-B.
2. Brief facts giving rise to filing of this petition are as
under:
Respondent No.1, while working as Taluk Extension
Officer, District Backward Classes and Minority Welfare
Department, Shahapur, during the year 2013 to 2016, the

- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10887-DB
WP No. 201799 of 2021
CNR: KAHC030276062021
Government Authority has passed an order and entrusting the
enquiry to the petitioner for irregularity committed by the
respondent No.1 on 10.06.2019. The respondent aggrieved by
the impugned order dated 10.06.2019, entrusting the matter to
the petitioner for conducting an enquiry in regard to the
irregularity committed by the respondent No.1 and articles of
charge were issued to the respondent No.1. The Respondent
No.1 approached the Tribunal in Application No.20017/2019.
The Tribunal vide order dated 20.09.2019 disposed of the
application with liberty to Respondent No.2 herein to take fresh
action as against Respondent No.1 herein, if permissible as per
Rule 214(2)(b) of KCS Rules. The petitioner aggrieved by the
order dated 20.09.2019 passed in Application No.20017/2019,
filed this writ petition.
3. Heard the arguments of the learned Spl.PP for the
petitioner, learned Additional Government Advocate for
Respondent No.2, and Sri.Shivkumar Mallipatil for Respondent
No.1.
4. Learned Spl.PP for the petitioner submits that the
Tribunal observed in respect of the retired Government

- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10887-DB
WP No. 201799 of 2021
CNR: KAHC030276062021
Servant, the Government could not have entrusted enquiry to
the petitioner-Lokayukta. The said observation is contrary to
Rule 214 of KCSR. The said Rule itself suggests an enquiry can
be conducted against the retired Government Servant. He also
submits that the Tribunal without assigning any reasons has
passed the impugned order. He submits that the matter
requires reconsideration by the Tribunal. He also submits that
the Tribunal while passing an impugned order has not applied
its mind. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow the writ
petition.
Per contra
5. , learned counsel for respondent No.1
supported the impugned order, contending that respondent
No.1 retired from service on attaining the age of
superannuation and the order of entrusting enquiry to the
Lokayukta after his retirement, i.e. on 10.06.2019. Hence, on
these grounds, he prays to dismiss the writ petition.
6. Perused the records and considered the
submissions of the learned counsel for the parties.

- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10887-DB
WP No. 201799 of 2021
CNR: KAHC030276062021
7. Respondent No.1 during the year 2013 to 2016
worked as Taluk Extension Officer, District Backward Classes
and Minority Welfare Department, Shahapur, certain
irregularities were committed by respondent No.1. One
Vijaykumar of Yadgir District submitted a complaint against
respondent No.1. The investigation was taken up by the
petitioner under Section 9(1) of Karnataka Lokayukta Act,
1984, for dereliction of duty and on other allegations.
8. After investigation, the petitioner following the
procedure forwarded the report under Section 12(3) of
Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984. to the competent authority to
initiate disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner and
others mentioned in the report and to entrust the enquiry to
the Respondent No.2 herein under Rule 214(2)(b)(ii) of KCS
Rules.
9. The Respondent No.2 nominated ARE(10), to issue
articles of charge and hold an enquiry in accordance with law.
The enquiry officer framed articles of charge on 07.08.2019
and served on respondent No.1. Respondent No.1 aggrieved by
the entrustment of enquiry to the petitioner and issuance of

- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10887-DB
WP No. 201799 of 2021
CNR: KAHC030276062021
articles of charge, approached the Tribunal in Application
No.20017/2019. The matter was listed for preliminary hearing
and the Tribunal directed a Government Pleader to accept
notice on behalf of respondent and on the same day, the
Tribunal has disposed of the Application with liberty to
Government to take fresh action as against Respondent No.1, if
permissible as per provisions under Rule 214(2)(b) of KCSR
Rules.
10. Admittedly, the alleged incident took place during
the year 2013-2016 and complaint came to be lodged against
the petitioner in the year 2018 without providing an
opportunity to participate in the proceedings, the Tribunal has
disposed of the application with liberty to Government to take
fresh action as against Respondent No.1, if permissible as per
provisions under Rule 214(2)(b) of KCS Rules.
11. Admittedly, the impugned order passed by the
Tribunal is behind the back of the petitioner. Thus, it amounts
to violation of principles of natural justice. Hence, on this
ground alone, the impugned order is liable to be quashed.

- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:10887-DB
WP No. 201799 of 2021
CNR: KAHC030276062021
12. In view of the above discussions, we proceed to
pass the following:
ORDER
allowed
(i) The writ petition is .
(ii) The impugned order dated 20.09.2019 passed
in Application No.20017/2019 is set aside.
(iii) The Application No.20017/2019 is restored to
its original file.
(iv) The Tribunal is directed to hear the petitioner
and thereafter pass appropriate orders in
accordance with law.
(v) It is made clear that this Court has not made
any adjudication on merits of the issue.
(vi) All contentions of the parties are kept open.
(vii) The parties are directed to appear before the
Tribunal on 16.11.2026 without awaiting any
further notice;
(viii) Pending IA(s) in this petition, if any, shall
stand disposed of.
Sd/-
(ASHOK S. KINAGI)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(SUBRAMANYA RANGARAO)
JUDGE
SDU
LIST NO.: 2 SL NO.: 26’
CT: AK