The Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal has lately quashed the suspension of a authorities servant who was punished for collaborating in an occasion organized by the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS).
A bench comprising Judicial Member S.Y. Watawati and Administrative Member Dr. Amita Prasad famous,
“…When there was no particular bar both on the applicant or on anyone from collaborating in such a company earlier than it has been declared as a political social gathering, it can’t be mentioned that the act of the applicant violated the situations stipulated within the Conduct Guidelines. When the State Authorities has not prohibited the participation of any citizen, together with a Authorities servant, within the actions carried out by such a company on holidays, the participation of the applicant in such actions, with out affecting his common work, i.e., on a vacation, is not going to violate any of the situations talked about in Guidelines 3 and 5 of the Conduct Guidelines, 2021”, the tribunal famous.
The Tribunal famous that whereas Rule 3(1) of the Conduct Guidelines mandates {that a} authorities servant should preserve devotion to obligation and keep away from unbecoming conduct, and Rule 5 prohibits affiliation with political events or actions, none of them can be relevant if RSS isn’t a political group.
Therefore, the Tribunal noticed that the RSS is a non-political cultural group and that the worker’s participation in its actions, on a vacation, didn’t quantity to misconduct underneath the Karnataka Civil Companies (Conduct) Guidelines, 2021, particularly for the reason that state has not barred the identical. Whereas doing so, the tribunal positioned its reliance on Ranganathachar Agnihotri Vs. State of Mysore and Others(1966).
For context, the applicant servant was working as a Panchayath Improvement Officer (PDO) on deputation as a Private Assistant to the MLA from Lingasugur Constituency. The federal government servant bought suspended on October 17, 2025, by the Commissioner of the Karnataka Panchayath Raj Commissionerate primarily based on a information report that he participated in an RSS occasion whereas carrying the group’s apparel.
Earlier than the Ttibunal, the federal government servant argued that the RSS is a non-governmental, nationalist group engaged in social and cultural actions. He additional contended that he participated within the occasion on a Sunday in his private capability, with out utilising any of his official place or sources.
Whereas the respondent authorities produced a Tweet from the BJP purportedly praising the RSS, the Tribunal clarified as under:
“…It isn’t the Tweet made on behalf of the RSSS, if mentioned Tweet has been issued by the RSSS, definitely might have held as it’s a part of BJP political social gathering, however that Tweet made by the BJP social gathering. Mere that BJP has Tweeted as from farmers to youth, schooling to surroundings, the RSSS Vichar Parivaar shapes society throughout each discipline matter would have been totally different. The BJP by the use of Tweet appreciated the occasions of RSSS. Mere that one political social gathering has appreciated the actions of the non-political group itself can’t be mentioned that the mentioned group is a part of that social gathering…”, the Tribunal famous additional.
The Tribunal concluded that the applicant’s actions didn’t violate the Conduct Guidelines and reasoned it by stating the next:
“…the alleged act of the applicant was in an occasion organized by a non-political social gathering. When he participated within the occasion organized by a non-political social gathering, the act of the applicant didn’t violate the situations stipulated in Rule 5 of the Conduct Guidelines, 2021. Additional, there was no bar imposed by the state Authorities by issuing any order or notification prohibiting any Authorities Official from collaborating in such an occasion”.
Therefore, the Tribunal allowed the appliance and quashed the suspension order, directing the respondents to grant all consequential advantages to the applicant. Nevertheless, it granted liberty to the respondent authorities to provoke a departmental enquiry towards the applicant, if necessity arose.
Advocates S.L Tejasvi Surya and Adv. Anirudh Kulkarni appeared for the petitioner. AGA Virangouda M Biradar appeared for the state authorities.
Case Title: Mr. Praveenkumar Ok.P. v. The State of Karnataka & Ors.
Case No.: Software No. 20709 of 2025
