CHETHAN KUMAR N vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60107
WP No. 28540 of 2023
CNR: KAHC010676802023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 29 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV
WRIT PETITION NO. 28540 OF 2023 (S-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. CHETHAN KUMAR N.
S/O NARAYANASWAMY,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
SENIOR HEALTH INSPECTOR,
CMC, KOLLEGAL,
R/AT DOOR NO.7/98,
BASTHIPURA MAIN ROAD,
RAMASWAMY LAYOUT,
KOLLEGAL,
CHAMARAJANAGR DISTRICT,
PIN 571440.
Digitally
signed by
VIDYA G R
Location:
HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
2. JAYALAKSHMI B.
W/O H. N. SURESH,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
SECOND DIVISION ASSISTANT,
TMC, YALANDUR,
R/AT DOOR NO.78/741,
14TH CROSS, MARUTHI NILAYA,
NEAR NAIDU FARM, KOLLEGAL,
CHAMARAJANGAR DISTRICT,
PIN 571440.
3. N MADESH,
S/O LATE NARAYANA,

- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60107
WP No. 28540 of 2023
CNR: KAHC010676802023
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
SECOND DIVISION ASSISTANT,
TMC, HANURU
RA/T DOOR NO.129/3,
S R ROAD, GUNDLUPETE,
CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT,
PIN 571111.
4. MANIYA M.
S/O LATE MADAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,
BILL COLLECTOR,
CMC, KOLLEGAL,
R/A HANURU, AMBEDKAR NAGAR,
HANURU TALUK,
CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT,
PIN 571439.
5. NANJUNDA SHETTY
S/O LATE RANGA SHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
BILL COLLECTOR,
CMC, CHAMARAJANAGAR,
R/AT BALEPETE, YELANDUR,
CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT,
PIN 571441.
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. PAVANA CHANDRA SHETTY H., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENMT,
URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,
VIKASA SOUDHA,

- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60107
WP No. 28540 of 2023
CNR: KAHC010676802023
DR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU 560001.
2. DIRECTOR OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION,
GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA,
9TH FLOOR, V. V. TOWERS,
BENGALURU 560001.
3.
THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT,
CHAMARAJANAGAR 571313.
4. PROJECT DIRECTOR
CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT,
D. C. COMPOUND,
CHAMARAJANAGAR - 571313.
5. HANURU TOWN MUNCIPAL COUNCIL,
HANURU TOWN,
CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT-571313.
6. Y GIRIRAJ,
FATHER NAME NOT KNOWN,
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
WORKING AS A MANAGER,
DISTRICT URBAN DEVELOPMENT CELL,
D. C. OFFICE BUILDING,
DOUBLE ROAD,
CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT,
PIN - 571313.
7. K SURESH
FATHER NAME NOT KNOWN,
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,

- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60107
WP No. 28540 of 2023
CNR: KAHC010676802023
WORKING AS A REVENUE OFFICER,
MYSURU CITY CORPORATION,
NEW SAYYAJI RAO ROAD,
MYSURU,
PIN 570024.
8. NANJUNDASWAMY
FATHER NAME NOT KNOWN,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
WORKING AS COMMISSIONER,
NANJANGUD CITY MUNCIPAL COMMISSION,
NEAR NEHRU CIRCLE, NANJANGUD,
MYSURU DISTRICT,
PIN 571301.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. MAMATHA SHETTY, AGA FOR R1 AND R3;
SMT. RUPA B.P., ADVOCATE FOR C/R2;
R6, R7, R8 ARE SERVED)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
IMPUGNED ORDER AGAINST THE PETITIONERS HEREIN
PASSED BY THE R2 DATED 04.12.2023 FROM SL.NO.2, 4 TO 7
IN ORDER BEARING ITS NO.280352/DMA/ENQ2/MYS/28/2020-
20 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-A ORDER FOR DEMOTION IN
RANK/STATUS OF THE PETITIONERS.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV

- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60107
WP No. 28540 of 2023
CNR: KAHC010676802023
ORAL ORDER
Issuance of notice as regards respondents No.4 and
5 is waived, in light of the memo filed by the petitioner
stating that the said respondents are only pro-forma
parties.
2. The present petition has been filed by the
employees of respondent No.5 - Town Municipal Council,
Hanuru Town, challenging the order at Annexure-A,
whereby the Director of Municipal Administration which is
a disciplinary authority by the impugned order had
imposed the punishment after accepting the enquiry report
as against the petitioners herein who are found at Sl.No.2
to 7 of the reduction to a lower stage in the time scale of
pay.
3. It is to be noticed that the petitioners would
contend that insofar as the employee who was the Chief
Officer of the Town Municipal Council, who was imposed
the punishment of compulsory retirement in a joint

- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60107
WP No. 28540 of 2023
CNR: KAHC010676802023
enquiry, the order at Annexure-A insofar as the said
employee had been challenged in W.P.No.9429/2024 and
the punishment imposed as against the said Chief Officer
was set aside by the order dated 19.12.2024 passed in
W.P.No.9429/2024 with further direction to the
respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service with
arrears, continuity of service and all consequential
benefits.
4. It is accordingly submitted that in light of one of
the delinquent employee of a joint enquiry having had the
benefit of the enquiry report being set aside as well as
penalty imposed being set aside on the basis of evidence
available on record, the said benefit on principle of parity
is required to be extended to the other co-delinquents.
5. Learned Additional Government Advocate would
submit that the said assertion of the petitioners is a
matter of record and in fact as per the order in
W.P.No.9429/2024, the penalty imposed as against the

- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60107
WP No. 28540 of 2023
CNR: KAHC010676802023
Chief Officer has been set aside and accordingly, it is
submitted that the Court may pass appropriate orders.
6. Perused the order passed in W.P.No.9429/2024.
It is not in dispute that the enquiry was a common
enquiry. Insofar as the evidence available pertaining to
Sri. Murthy, the Chief Officer, the Co-ordinate Bench has
examined in detail the evidence on record and has set
aside the order of penalty. The relevant observations
made by the Co-ordinate Bench on the merits of the
matter are found at para-34, which reads as follows:
" 34. Conclusions:
1. Violation of procedure: The penalty of
compulsory retirement imposed on the petitioner
contravenes Rule 8(vi) of the Karnataka Civil
Service (Classification, Control, and Appeal)
Rules, 1957. This rule stipulates that such
penalties are to be reserved for cases involving
proven charges of corruption or misconduct
supported by substantial evidence.
2. Absence of Corruption Charges: The charges
against the petitioner relate solely to the issuance

- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60107
WP No. 28540 of 2023
CNR: KAHC010676802023
of e-katha certificates without adequate
verification of record conversion orders and layout
plans. No allegations or evidence were presented
that could constitute corruption or "criminal
misconduct" as defined under Section 13 of the
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
3. Lack of Substantiated Evidence: The
disciplinary enquiry failed to present credible or
verifiable evidence demonstrating that the
petitioner’s actions caused any financial loss to
the State or involved unapproved layouts. The
assertion of revenue loss remains unsupported by
documentary proof.
4. Inadequate Justification for Recovery: The
directive to recover Rs. 4,43,170/- with 8%
interest from the petitioner is baseless, as neither
the rationale for this calculation nor supporting
records have been provided.
5. Petitioner’s Compliance with Legal
Procedures: The petitioner provided detailed
explanations and supporting documents, including
prior conversion orders and technical approvals,
which demonstrated that the issuance of e-kathas
adhered to legal and procedural norms. The

- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60107
WP No. 28540 of 2023
CNR: KAHC010676802023
Disciplinary Authority failed to rebut these
explanations or present counter-evidence.
6. Non-Reliance on Critical Report: Although a
financial loss report prepared by the Deputy
Commissioner (DC) was referenced by the
respondents, it was not introduced or relied upon
during the enquiry proceedings, undermining the
credibility and admissibility of the findings.
Compounding the procedural deficiency is the fact
that the report has not been produced before this
Court, thereby rendering it impossible for judicial
scrutiny or evaluation of its contents and
authenticity.
7. Retaliatory Proceedings: The initiation of
departmental proceedings appears to be
retaliatory, following the petitioner’s challenge to
a transfer order and the initiation of contempt
proceedings against senior officials. This points to
potential malafide intent and abuse of
administrative power.
8. Failure to Follow Procedural Fairness: The
disciplinary process lacked procedural fairness, as
evidenced by speculative findings unsupported by
verifiable evidence and the absence of a clear
basis for penalty imposition.

- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60107
WP No. 28540 of 2023
CNR: KAHC010676802023
9. Legal Unsustainability of the Penalty: The
impugned penalty of compulsory retirement,
coupled with the financial recovery directive, is
legally unsustainable due to the lack of
substantive evidence and procedural deficiencies.
10. Failure of Disciplinary Authority to Rebut
Evidence: Despite the petitioner's provision of
robust counter-evidence, the Disciplinary
Authority failed to effectively challenge or rebut
these claims. The lack of any meaningful effort to
address or discredit the petitioner's documentary
submissions reflects a procedural oversight that
significantly weakens the credibility of the
authority's stance.
11. Inquiry Officer’s Omission to Address Crucial
Explanations: The Inquiry Officer inexplicably
neglected to address the petitioner's key
explanations and evidence during the
proceedings. This omission amounts to a failure
to conduct a fair and impartial assessment of the
facts and constitutes a procedural defect
undermining the findings of the inquiry. The
Disciplinary Authority disregarded the petitioner’s
explanation, failing to provide reasoned findings
or cogent justifications for rejecting the
petitioner's evidence. Such disregard contravenes

- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60107
WP No. 28540 of 2023
CNR: KAHC010676802023
principles of procedural fairness and due process,
which mandate that decision-making authorities
meaningfully engage with the submissions and
evidence of the accused.
12. Necessity to Set Aside Penalty: In view of the
aforementioned points, the order of compulsory
retirement is disproportionate and lacks legal
justification. The imposition of penalties without
due process and substantiation undermines the
principles of justice and fairness, warranting the
setting aside of the impugned order.
13. The Appellate Authority (Respondent No. 1)
failed to adequately consider or address the
detailed explanations and evidence submitted by
the petitioner in response to the charges. Instead,
the authority mechanically affirmed the order of
compulsory retirement without providing any
independent analysis or reasoned justification for
rejecting the petitioner's submissions. This
perfunctory approach violates principles of natural
justice and due process, rendering the appellate
decision legally unsustainable."
7. Taking note of the stand of the respondents and
also the fact of the joint enquiry, the order at Annexure-A

- 12 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60107
WP No. 28540 of 2023
CNR: KAHC010676802023
insofar as the petitioners, requires to be set aside by
taking note of the observations made in
W.P.No.9429/2024.
8. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The
impugned order at Annexure-A insofar as it concerns
petitioners herein is set aside. Accordingly, the penalty
imposed against the petitioners of reduction to lower stage
in time scale of pay is set aside.
9. Respondents are directed to re-instate the
petitioners forthwith into service, with arrears, continuity
of service and all consequential benefits. The compliance
of the order is to be completed within a period of four (4)
weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the
order.
Accordingly, the petition is allowed .
Sd/-
(S SUNIL DUTT YADAV)
JUDGE
MCR