T. THIMME GOWDA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is working as Chief Engineer in the Karnataka Urban Water Supply and Drainage Board, Bangalore (for short, 'the Board'), having been appointed as such on 09.12.2013. In this writ petition, he is questioning the legality and correctness of the order dated 26.12.2013 issued by the State Government, by which he is transferred from the post in which he was working as Chief Engineer (South), Bangalore, with a direction to report to the Managing Director of the 2nd respondent-Board until further orders for his posting. In his place, the 3rd respondent M.Rangadhamaiah working as Chief Engineer, Karnataka Urban Water Supply and Drainage Board, Gulbarga, on independent charge is transferred and posted with immediate effect. This order dated 26.12.2013 which is produced at Annexure-D is called in question in this writ petition.

(2.) Facts, briefly stated, reveal that the petitioner was appointed as Assistant Engineer in the 2nd respondent-Board. He was promoted to the cadre of Assistant Executive Engineer and later on as Executive Engineer and thereafter, as Chief Engineer. In fact, the promotion of the petitioner as Chief Engineer is evidenced by Annexure-A order dated 09.12.2013. As is clear from Annexure-A, another person by name G.M.Madegowda was also promoted as Chief Engineer and posted as Chief Engineer (North), Dharwad, whereas the petitioner was promoted as Chief Engineer (South), Bangalore. The 3rd respondent M.Rangadhamaiah was also working as Executive Engineer in the 2nd respondent-Board along with the other two persons who are now promoted as Chief Engineers. He was placed in charge of the post of Chief Engineer, Gulbarga, on independent charge under Rule 32 of the Karnataka Civil Service Rules (for short, 'KSCR').

(3.) It is thus clear that while the petitioner and his other colleague G.M.Madegowda were appointed on promotion as Chief Engineers, the 3rd respondent M.Rangadhamaiah was placed in charge of the post of Chief Engineer under Rule 32 of the KCSR. It is not in dispute that this promotion was effected pursuant to the recommendation made by the Departmental Promotion Committee (for short, 'DPC'). The 3rd respondent has been placed in independent charge of the post of Chief Engineer under Rule 32 of the KCSR in view of the pendency of the request of one Krishnamurthy for consideration. The said Krishnamurthy has sought for retrospective promotion towards backlog vacancies, as is evident from the recommendation of DPC, which is placed before the Court along with a memo filed by the petitioner.