MUHAMMED ZEESHAN Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3 State, and learned counsel appearing for respondent No.5. Notice to respondent No.4 is dispensed with.

(2.) The relief sought in the writ petition is as follows:

(3.) The contention of the petitioner in the writ petition is that, the petitioner is assailing the order dtd. 19/11/2025 passed by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal at Bengaluru (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal"), in Application No.2978/2025 vide Annexure-A. It is contend that the petitioner had preferred an application under Sec. 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, challenging the premature transfer. The Memorandum of Application is produced as Annexure-B.