KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA vs MUTTURAJ B N
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11696-DB
WP No. 201567 of 2025
CNR: KAHC030001582025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
TH
DATED THIS THE 29 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMANYA RANGARAO
WRIT PETITION NO. 201567 OF 2025 (S-KAT)
BETWEEN:
1. THE KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA,
REPRESENTED BY REGISTRAR,
M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU- 560 001.
2. THE ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR OF ENQUIRES-12,
KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA,
M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001.
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. SUBHASH MALLAPUR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. MUTTURAJ B. N. S/O. LATE. B. NINGAPPA,
AGED:43 YEARS, OCC: WORKING AS
SUPERINTENDENT,
OFFICE OF THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER,
VIJAYAPURA, VIJAYAPURA DISTRICT- 586 101,
R/O. PLOT NO.17, SHIVAKRUPA BUILDING,
NEAR SIDDASHREE BANK, RING ROAD,
SADASHIV NAGAR, VIJAYAPURA-586101.
Digitally signed
by B NAGAVENI
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11696-DB
WP No. 201567 of 2025
CNR: KAHC030001582025
2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT,
M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU- 560 001.
3. THE COMMISSIONER FOR TRANSPORT & ROAD
SAFETY,
ST
1 FLOOR, A BLOCK, BMTC COMPLEX, K.H. ROAD,
SHANTHINAGAR, BENGALURU-560027.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. PRITHVEESH M. K. AND
SRI SHEKHAR G. ALAND, ADVOCATES FOR R1;
SRI NARENDRA M. REDDY, HCGP FOR R2 & R3)
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 03.07.2024 PASSED
BY THE KARNATAKA STATE
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL IN
KALABURAGI APPLICATION
NO.20024/2023 VIDE ANNEXURE-
C.
B) ISSUE ANY OTHER WRIT ORDER OR
DIRECTION AS THIS HON’BLE
COURT DEEMS FIT UNDER THE
CIRCUMSTANCE OF THE CASE.
C) PASS ANY SUCH ORDER OR
DIRECTION DEEMS FIT UNDER THE
CIRCUMSTANCE OF THE CASE.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11696-DB
WP No. 201567 of 2025
CNR: KAHC030001582025
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)
1. The petitioners filed this writ petition challenging the
order dated 03.07.2024 passed in Application
No.20024 of 2023 by the Karnataka State
Administrative Tribunal, Kalaburagi (for short, ‘ the
Tribunal ’).
2. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this writ
petition are as follows:
3. A complaint was lodged before the Lokayukta
alleging that respondent No.1, while working as a
FDA in the Regional Transport Office, Vijayapur,
came to be lodged before the Anti-Corruption
Bureau, Vijaypura, alleging that RTO officials are
collecting illegal amount from the driver and owners
of the vehicle at Zalki Check Post.
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11696-DB
WP No. 201567 of 2025
CNR: KAHC030001582025
4. The Anti Corruption Bureau, Vijayapura (for short,
‘ ACB’ ), registered a case in Crime No.3 of 2017 and
conducted a search operation at Zalki RTO Check
Post and found that the officials had collected an
excess amount than the receipts and arrested all the
officials present at the check post and the Delinquent
Government Official (DGO) / respondent No.1 was
one among them. The petitioners, by taking suo
motu cognizance of the misconduct submitted a
report under Section 12(3) of the Karnataka
Lokayukta Act to the competent authority
recommending to hold an enquiry against respondent
No.1. Upon the entrustment of the enquiry the
petitioners issued articles of charge to respondent
No.1.
5. Respondent No.1 aggrieved by the order of
entrustment of enquiry and issuance of the articles of
charge, approached the Tribunal in Application
No.20024 of 2023. The Tribunal by order dated
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11696-DB
WP No. 201567 of 2025
CNR: KAHC030001582025
03.07.2024 allowed the application and the
impugned entrustment order passed by petitioner
No.1 herein (respondent No.1 therein) insofar as the
applicant is concerned vide order bearing No.TD01
TDS 2022 dated 28.09.2022 as per Annexure A6 and
Articles of Charge bearing No.1/DE/303/2022/ARE-
12 dated 08.11.2022 issued by respondent No.4
(therein) as per Annexure-A7 were set aside and the
de novo
matter was remitted for consideration from
the stage of issuance of observation note in the
manner discussed thereat, with all the contentions of
the parties being kept open.
6. The petitioners aggrieved by the order passed by the
Tribunal have filed this writ petition.
7. Heard the arguments of the learned State Special
Public Prosecutor for the petitioners; learned counsel
for respondent No.1 and learned High Court High
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11696-DB
WP No. 201567 of 2025
CNR: KAHC030001582025
Court Government Pleader for respondent Nos.2 and
3.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
Tribunal committed an error in remanding the matter
de novo
for enquiry. He submits that the provisions
of Sections 15, 19 and 21 of Karnataka Lokayukta
Act, which provide for an authority to the Lokayukta
or Upalokaukta, while in discharge of their functions
under the Lokayukta Act, could employ any officers
or employees, as may be prescribed, to assist them.
Section 15 provides that the Lokayukta or
Upalokayukta are empowered to appoint any officer
or employees for discharge of their work under the
Lokayukta Act. The said aspect was not considered
by the Tribunal and committed an error in passing
the impugned judgment. Hence, on these grounds,
he prays to allow the writ petition.
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11696-DB
WP No. 201567 of 2025
CNR: KAHC030001582025
9. Learned counsel for respondent No.1 supported the
impugned order and prays to dismiss the writ
petition.
10. Perused the records, and considered the submissions
of the learned counsel for the parties.
11. It is an undisputed fact that while respondent No.1
was working as FDA in RTO Office, Vijayapura, a
complaint came to be lodged before the Anti
Corruption Bureau, Vijayapura, alleging that the RTO
Officials are collecting illegal amount from the drivers
and the owners of the vehicle at Zalki RTO Check
Post. Based on the complaint, the ACB, Vijayapura
registered a case in Crime No.3 of 2017 and
conducted a search operation at Zalki RTO Check
Post and found that the RTO officials had collected an
excess amount than the receipt and arrested all the
officials present in the check post and respondent
No.1 was one among them.
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11696-DB
WP No. 201567 of 2025
CNR: KAHC030001582025
suo motu
12. The petitioners, by taking cognizance of
the misconduct, submitted a report under Section
12(3) of the Karnataka Lokayukta Act to the
competent authority, and the competent authority
after examining the report, intimated the petitioners
to hold a disciplinary enquiry against respondent
No.1 and entrusted the enquiry to the petitioners.
13. The petitioners issued an articles of charge to
respondent No.1.
14. Respondent No.1, aggrieved by the order of
entrustment of the enquiry, has approached the
Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal.
15. The Tribunal, after examining the entire material on
record and the provisions of Section 15 of the
Karnataka Lokayukta Act, has recorded its finding in
paragraph 13, which reads as follows:
“13. The above said provision made it
clear that the officers and employees of
- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11696-DB
WP No. 201567 of 2025
CNR: KAHC030001582025
the Hon'ble Lokayukta shall assist the
Lokayukta and Upalokayukta in
discharging of their functions under the
Act and Section 19 of the Karnataka
Lokayukta Act deals with conferment of
the additional functions of the
Upalokayukta and Section 21 makes it
clear that the Upalokayukta may, subject
to such rules as may be prescribed, by
general or special order, in writing, direct
that the functions and powers conferred
by Section 19 may also be exercised or
discharged by such of the officers,
employees or agencies referred to in
Section 15 as may be specified in the
order. The position of law makes it clear
that the Upalokayukta can delegate his
power to the officers, employees or
agencies referred to in Section 15, that
order should be in writing. In the instant
case this Tribunal vide order dated
06.01.2023 while admitting the
application at the first instance passed an
order staying the order bearing No.TD 01
TDS 2022 dated 28.09.2022 passed by
the first respondent vide Annexure-A6 till
next date of hearing and the respondents
- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11696-DB
WP No. 201567 of 2025
CNR: KAHC030001582025
were directed to get information relating
to Annexure- A5.”
16. In order to consider the case on hand, it is necessary
to examine Section 15 of the Karnataka Lokayukta
Act, which reads as follows:
15. Staff of Lokayukta, etc.- (1) There
shall be such officers and employees as
may be prescribed to assist the
Lokayukta and the Upalokayutha or the
Upalokayuktas in the discharge of their
functions under this Act.
(2) The categories, recruitment and
conditions of service of the officers and
employees referred in sub-section (1)
including such special conditions as may
be necessary for enabling them to act
without fear in the discharge of their
functions, shall be such as may be
prescribed in consultation with the
Lokayukta
(3) Without prejudice to the provisions of
sub-section (1) the Lokayukta or an
Upalokayukta may for the purpose of
- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11696-DB
WP No. 201567 of 2025
CNR: KAHC030001582025
conducting investigations under this Act
utilise the services of,-
(a) any officer or investigating
agency of the State Government;
or
(aa) any officer or investigating
agency of the Central Government
with the prior concurrence of the
Central Government and State
Government; or
(b) any person or any other
agency.
(4) The officers and other employees
referred to in sub-section (1) shall be
under the administrative and disciplinary
control of the Lokayukta:
Provided that when the office of the
Lokayukta is vacant by reason of his
death, resignation, retirement, removal
or otherwise or when Lokayukta is unable
to discharge his functions owing to
absence, illness or any other cause, the
Upalokayukta or if there are more than
one Upalokayukta, the senior among
them may discharge the functions of the
Lokayukta under this subsection.
17. From the bare reading of Section 15 of the Act, it is
clear that the officers or the employees of the
Lokayukta shall assist the Lokayukta or Upa-
- 12 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11696-DB
WP No. 201567 of 2025
CNR: KAHC030001582025
Lokayukta in discharging their functions under the
Act.
18. Sections 19 and 21 of the Karnataka Lokayukta Act
read as follows:
“19. Conferment of additional
functions on Upalokayukta.- (1) The
Government may, by order, in writing
and after consultation with an
Upalokayukta, confer on the
Upalokayukta powers to hold, in such
manner and through such officers,
employees and agencies referred to in
section 15 as may be prescribed,
enquiries against Government servants
and persons referred to in item (g) of
clause (12) of section 2 other than those
falling under clauses (ii) and (iv) of sub-
section (1) of section 7, in disciplinary or
2[other proceedings transferred under
sub-section (3) of section 26 commenced
in furtherance of the recommendations of
the Upalokayukta or otherwise.
(2) Where powers are conferred on an
Upalokayukta under sub-section (1) such
- 13 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11696-DB
WP No. 201567 of 2025
CNR: KAHC030001582025
Upalokayukta shall exercise the same
powers and discharge the same functions
as he would in the case of any
investigation made on a complaint
involving a grievance or an allegation, as
the case may be, and the provisions of
this Act shall apply accordingly.”
x x x
“21. Power to delegate.- The
Upalokayukta may, subject to such rules
as may be prescribed, by general or
special order, in writing , direct that the
functions and powers conferred by
section 19 may also be exercised or
discharged by such of the officers,
employees or agencies referred to in
section 15 as may be specified in the
order.”
(emphasis supplied)
19. From the bare reading of Section 19, it is clear that
the conferment of the power can be vested with
Lokayukta or Upalokyukta, to hold, in such manner
and through such officers, employees and agencies
- 14 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11696-DB
WP No. 201567 of 2025
CNR: KAHC030001582025
referred to in Section 15 as may be prescribed,
enquiries against Government servants.
20. Further, Section 21 makes it clear that Upalokayukta
may, subject to rules as may be prescribed, by
general or special order, in writing direct the
functions and power conferred by Section 19 may be
exercised or discharged by such of the officers,
employees referred in Section 15.
21. Thus, it is clear that Upalokayukta can delegate his
power to the officers, employees to execute functions
and powers referred to in Section 15 of the Act.
22. However, the Presenting Officer, without in writing
has issued an observation note to respondent No.1
and called for his comment on the allegations. The
very observation note is illegal and contrary to the
provisions of law, as such, the Tribunal has rightly
passed the impugned order. Moreover, admittedly,
de novo
the matter is remanded for consideration.
- 15 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-K:11696-DB
WP No. 201567 of 2025
CNR: KAHC030001582025
Hence, we do not find any error in the impugned
order.
23. Accordingly, we proceed to pass the following order:
ORDER
(i) The writ petition is dismissed .
(ii) Pending IAs, if any stand disposed
of.
Sd/-
(ASHOK S. KINAGI)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(SUBRAMANYA RANGARAO)
JUDGE
RK
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3
Ct:pk