High CourtsDivision Bench(2018) 10 KAR CK 0018

Dr. Darshan vs State Of Karnataka

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 29 October 2018

HON’BLE JUDGES
H. G. Ramesh, J · S. Sunil Dutt Yadav, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition No. 47456, 48235, 48246 Of 2018

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

19 paragraphs · 323 words

H.G.Ramesh, J.

1.

Petitioners are veterinary doctors. These writ petitions are directed against the order dated 17.10.2018 passed by the Karnataka State

Administrative Tribunal dismissing the petitioners’ applications in application Nos.7518-7530/2018. In the said applications, the petitioners had

challenged two orders, both dated 12.10.2018, whereby the State Government has cancelled deputation of the petitioners to the Department of Rural

Development & Panchayath Raj or the Department of Urban Development, as the case may be, and has withdrawn their services to the Parent

Department namely, Department of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Services.

2.

We have heard the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners and perused the record. He submits that cancellation of deputation of the

petitioners to the other departments is contrary to Rule 50(3) of the Karnataka Civil Services Rules and the guidelines laid down by the Government

for transfer of Government servants and also two Government Circulars dated 15.01.1977 and 18.11.1981. In support of the writ petitions, he also

referred to two decisions of the Supreme Court in Umapati Choudhary v. State of Bihar [(1999) 4 SCC 659] and Union of India v. S.N.Maity [(2015)

4 SCC 164].

3.

We have examined the matter. The result of cancellation of the deputation is that the petitioners, who are veterinary doctors, will now work in

veterinary hospitals. This, in our opinion, is undoubtedly in public interest and does not contravene any Rule, transfer guidelines or Circulars or

decisions referred to by the learned Senior Counsel.

4.

We find no ground to interfere with the order of the Administrative Tribunal impugned herein. The writ petitions are devoid of merit and are

accordingly dismissed. In view of dismissal of the writ petitions, IA Nos.1 & 2 of 2018 also stand dismissed.

5.

Learned Additional Government Advocate submits that if any representation is given by any of the petitioners, it would be considered within 15

days from today. His submission is placed on record.

Petitions dismissed.