Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Sri Shivakumar, working as Section Superintendent in the District Police Office, Bidar, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 19.07.2018 passed by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore, in Application No.5339/2018, whereby his application was rejected. The petitioner contended that while he was working as First Division Assistant, the 2nd respondent by an order dated 29.05.2018 promoted the 4th respondent, Sri Eranna, to the post of Section Superintendent and transferred him to Police Range Office, Bellary. The petitioner argued that the promotion and transfer of the 4th respondent was illegal and arbitrary. The respondents, represented by the Additional Government Advocate and counsel for the 4th respondent, opposed the petition. The High Court, after hearing the parties, held that the petitioner has no locus standi to challenge the promotion and transfer of the 4th respondent as no legal right of the petitioner is infringed. The court found no merit in the petition and dismissed it, upholding the Tribunal's order.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Locus Standi - Promotion and Transfer - Petitioner, a Section Superintendent, challenged promotion and transfer of a co-employee (4th respondent) from First Division Assistant to Section Superintendent. - Held that the petitioner has no locus standi to challenge the promotion and transfer of another employee as no legal right of the petitioner is infringed. The Tribunal's order rejecting the application was upheld. (Paras 1-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner has locus standi to challenge the promotion and transfer of the 4th respondent, and whether the Tribunal erred in rejecting the application.
Final Decision
The writ petition is dismissed. The order of the Tribunal dated 19.07.2018 in Application No.5339/2018 is upheld.
Law Points
- Locus standi
- Promotion and transfer
- Service law
- Writ jurisdiction
- Administrative Tribunal
Case Details
2018 LawText (KAR) (10) 32
Writ Petition No.202412/2018 (S-KAT)
S. Sujatha, Mohammad Nawaz
Sri Mahesh Patil (for petitioner), Sri K.M.Ghate (AGA for R1 to R3), Sri B.C.Jaka (for R4)
Sri Shivakumar S/o Vidhyadhar Dubalgunde
The State of Karnataka, The Director General & Inspector General of Police, The Superintendent of Police, Bidar, Sri Eranna
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order of the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal rejecting the petitioner's application.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought to set aside the Tribunal's order dated 19.07.2018 in Application No.5339/2018.
Filing Reason
Petitioner challenged the promotion and transfer of the 4th respondent, claiming it was illegal and arbitrary.
Previous Decisions
The Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore, rejected the petitioner's application on 19.07.2018.
Issues
Whether the petitioner has locus standi to challenge the promotion and transfer of the 4th respondent.
Whether the Tribunal erred in rejecting the application.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the promotion and transfer of the 4th respondent was illegal and arbitrary.
Respondents opposed the petition, contending that the petitioner has no locus standi.
Ratio Decidendi
A person who has no legal right infringed cannot challenge the promotion and transfer of another employee. The petitioner lacks locus standi.
Judgment Excerpts
The petitioner has called in question the correctness and legality of the order passed by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore... whereby the application filed by the petitioner herein has been rejected.
The petitioner contends that while he was working as First Division Assistant... the 2nd respondent by an order dated 29.05.2018 promoted the 4th respondent...
The petitioner has no locus standi to challenge the promotion and transfer of the 4th respondent as no legal right of the petitioner is infringed.
Procedural History
The petitioner filed Application No.5339/2018 before the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore, which was rejected on 19.07.2018. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed the present writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India before the High Court of Karnataka, Kalaburagi Bench, which was dismissed on 23.10.2018.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India: Articles 226, 227
