SUBRAMANYAM O Vs. DIVISIONAL COMMR GULBARGA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As common questions of law arise for for determination in these cases, I propose to dispose of them by a common order.

(2.) All the petitioners were working in one or the other capacity in the City Municipality of Bellary (hereinafter referred to as the Municipalty'). ln-the impugned orders, the Divisonal Commissioner, Gu'barga Division, Gulbarga (herein after referred to as, 'the Commissioner) .a transf'erred the ptiitioners from Bellar v. Municipalty of certain other City or law Municipalites situated in his division port on administrative rounds or in public interest.

(3.) Kirstly, tlie petitioners have urged that their transfer are in contravention of R 12 of the Karnataka Municipalities (Condision of Service of Officers and Servants) Rule 1972 (herenafter referred to as 'the Rules') framed under the provisions of the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act"), Secondly, the petitioners have urged that they had been appointed in the Municipality paior to the promulgation of the Act and therefore, they cannot be trsnsferred from that Municipality to any other Municipality. Lastly, the petitioners have alleged that Government had withdrawn the power conferred on the Commissioner to make transfers and, therefore, it was not open to him to make transfers.