Karnataka High Court
Sri S Venkataravanappa vs The Senior Superintendent Of Post ... on 24 March, 2011
Bench: Ajit J Gunjal, C.R.Kumaraswamy
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DMED THIS THE 24?" x:>/rw QF MARCH, 2611
PRESENT
THE HON'Bi..E §'~'§R.3EJSTICE REIT} GUNJAL
AND
Tugrfimwausmasugnce:RKuMARAsw%Mk 7§«'
vvRyrpETrnwewcxéaes/2a1:{sw:Afj5f * ;,"
BETWEEN:
SRLS VENKATARAVANAPPA
AGES ABOUT 52 YEARS
S/O LATE CHO\iVDA§3P}5E
CECCZSUS PC3531" MASTER . v_
SRENIVASAPURA POST OFFICE": _ Y
SR§f'\§IW3\S§3xPUR£1\ - 563 135
RESIDING A'? SLEB P<J::2T~v._¥}«1;aa.%$"§'E9;"-3_QI3:«RTER$
SR§NIV£%S§\?{}_FiA POST 0«E€~°?ICE._
SRiE\§1V'ASA?UR£§ - %563-1333;' _
V. . A. . PETITIGNER
g--a?{_ gm § i*25g!?:a¥3$3°:i\V;fixRE\3E5,A .z%Q_T\f»§
1.~.fl:.g«§7E*a*={:"%:_z;;*::P;'ég'£;s'é§R:NTEmEwT <35" ms? cwzaa gigma FZ%E'§éEf_':'£ON %<Oi.5'3:R;._?~ $63 :0:
THE c'H----:é:= $03"? MASYSR @E¥\iE§;Xl'=@ ._ e<A'R:x:ATAKA CIREKE mrszsaaaaag M 369 S61 U§'\I§QN Q? §i\§§I&;
fV'§§§"éE§TR'f' Q?' {:IiC>i"-'»'§§'v"%§LJE"*zéEC15:,"TIQ§"x3§ aaraééfiates ware gerrnéttafi in iaéazz mg dagartmeniafi '°\ / REPRESENTED BY ETS SECREYQRY QEPARTMENT OF F'OS"§"S DAK BHAVAN NEW DEL3°€I W 110 091.
RES?Of'~§E3Ef'~§"§'E3 THES WP ES FZLED UNQER ARTICLES?» 226 /$si"~§S 22? {St"'?7----.»THE CC)Ni7>T§"§"UTE{}N C}? I{'%DI£~'« ?RfWI!'-§{3 TC) QU£3aSH THE EFWPUGFGEDTQRQER @5553 E'? HOWBLE CENTRAL ADMINEETRATIVE 'r.p;1"a.:;--;sw.k, EANGALGRE BE!°~éCH, BANGALGRE EN cm :'@<:>.3:?,i2;*a3:;'<3..VV'~.r3A*:';E§>A 08.11.2010 VEDQ ANNWJ 8'? DIRECTENG THE RE§PQ{'éDE--5f%§§'$ "TRE}7§"T "
THAT THE PETITIONER §x,aM:;\:A?:<:>;\: FOR ms? TRACK §3'RO§'«'1OTIO 23?" MAY, 2094 Am §":"c:.;
in-.».H_EL9 an 26?,» 2'2"?-;xr~:-rs THES WP COMING ON FOR PRTE§~If\'§I|\4E'fi3P4Y._HEA 2'-UIT3 GUNJAL, 3., MADE TEE FOL§OV'VI§§«§i A '";"?éIS'; égix Q R D The petitioner is aggvr§é5§xeci'--.Lb\;{_»'tE'ié:. <3q;€ifer passed by the Centre}? Admin%--$t.:*é:i:éf:?'<:":':';2f:r§Vbu":n=Lal--::4{Afnr"nhoiit Tribunal') rejecting his application the representations are given after the evenfV'né«s_Voxa<3:VE 'a'n_'étner is that there is considerabie Zcéeeéafiy § ¥§€V §Ei';;};}{_§_{;§a.tE€}E1, We Qrepase is add ene mere § %<§_;xs2E§f i:%1aAt--.£A;_fye '>v;;>.A.veA:té'.':.i_Q:'2e:' is net entitled for premstionk T§§;e 'V'§?;{fE:.saE matrix £3 that the petétéenar wag werkéng _ _f'--«.§a§';:_'Pesi:aE~.fi§'§:;+éétar'::. it aapearg that Defiartmentai Examination
4._'_"f§rXFaAgéL"T.ra:§< gmmetéan :9 LEE {§§'°3@8 was mm mm aié the §§ DEEMEQ TO HAV§...__P'£\,SVSE£w THE._ "' 3 written exareinatien for the Fast Track prernetien to LS6 Sraee which was te take piece between 26"', 2?" and 28" ef May 2004 eureuent te ennexere-C dated 2135,2064. The eiairetzt the petitioner Ee that he was not perméttee to take up exert1§'ee'aien for the reasoe that he was undergoing a reievent point: ef time. It is rzeticed the_t..th,e pe%;Etie"ne':f"
a representation te the concerned autVt:.Qri;f3';r made a request that reason must»tbVe---.g'iveah"-fie te_Vxe.tttg}~V.j.;iae--..we3e aiiewed to take up the e><ee:inatv§Q.nVV':A'?e_r'festh"E'ea:£t}f< gtromotion. Another representation a§:)--;"iee.re 4"r'eé:"v.e't--.,been given en e2.o3.2oeet.' "" f? V _
3. Vffhe' tieepti-::1de_n'tee_A"'pu'rssuant to Annex:.:re--F dated 3e.0e,2eee deem-aeyd 4Vef:te:*§:e§e ttzeee representatéene er: the vevreene the petétteinver «had sufficient opportunity to represent te__Vtt:e*eerngeerfegfiagfggherity befere the examination teek pteee, but'Ri1e'e:e?xe'r'ttkeeeeetentetéene ere meée on 22tG§.208S aee 8i£V,Q3.Z:5'0e"*-ettee grxeesteg ef the event, Hence, the euestiee ef .Vv:V'e:T{eeEt3e::é4_egthis request te eeeeer fer exereieetiee which is e.E.t_eee§?'eeer ezeeie mt etéee. Eeeeeef tee Trébeeeé tsee eejeetee it ,4tV .5 Mr-"'" ""' _,».v""
,2 ' ,/"J 4%?"
the said agplicatien en the sole ground that since the event is already ever, the question 01' granténg reiief in the cit§y reSté'eees weeid not arise. Anether reasen fer the Tribuna§'?f.__e ae::i5ee»:%e gram: appiicetéen was that an eedorserriefi'z.::e§:£'§.nir3g:A§0'«_ef:te%'teL'i'n the representation is; dated 3O.T;06.2(j'0§»:'--efad f'rj._e "ap'pi"iee'E:ie'n_ before the Tribunai was made in t"i:«eV'V"year 55 the View that question of mterfeeij_ing ewi'tr1AVVefifie'""e§dere 'gassed by the Tribunaf in the circumstances w.e'u§c3-:¥e't 4, 1;ap%¢;;Aca£m is sought to be rejected ivféfiwéemities, which warrant interference, netiee that serious charges were Ieveitee es? agei'n'Steij'i1;é':"i"3;éMi0ner ie, 5) that the appeilaratt whiie wejr"i<'i:e':.g as "P.esiei Assistant 2:: Srirzéveseeure during the In'per;ied.':§r=en:%'.L: 2$';{}5,1§98 ':0 21.12.1999 wrete 'Ewe indecent £e*£tezfjs"~?;_3V.TA§<1e%';*:.,;_i<VAV.¥f>'§»""§.eeeievat§":£, Pasta! Assistant, S.ri:':i\/asepure; Es} Eheteée .._;ap;:se'§§eeE white working as SPM fietheeaiye $0 ever the 3'1"-eeeets ef withdrewais in 2 SB eeceurvts but did eat
-eémeuate Se eazerwriiten emeeeiéne E0 Re.3,e§8j« ie the VT .§eee':~:iéi:ere vieietmg Qeie 33iS){§j eeee' with Rifle 33{3}(b}{§az} of A _E POSS Mamai veiume I; and iii) mat the appeftant while wiyxfking as SPM Patifiapaiya faiied ta account far the dep0sitf,;u.._a:'r2§b§{r}%tiVirag tu R$.3,C1GQ/~ in fear RS accounts in vicdatien cf §%1::;:Eevj§:?fl:T6'--':*e,=:V:§.,'fi with Rule 31{2){i)(§} and Rafe :20 reaé w:u; "--Ruf;e}}:€2._:{f"F5O§'{3 Mama! vufume 1 and Rule 103 Tnf r:¥*:z_;"€j Fu3"V_:#:Aanu«a:"
Pursuant to thig, the petitioner was"--!§épt i..ii"'i"C3&~i'". Su.s§,:_:eEi"s>i't$'€€. S S. indeed, we arVe"'«--._u'I'_tf'§V:eL Hciuim of the petitioner certainty caranetZbe.:.c;jVns;Vi-}j¢§;u;fe'¥§"'v_%<§fV'*.1.'§s:0motion on the greund that net. difi mt apgear fer the examir1a'tE';;:::,-V..v%.j'é"Vi"g__<:E%§é_;a*;£%£%K.' uassed the examinatien and he muééflt he: .§ZK;!V'V<fi1'VUVQfCé'd. 63 Mrjffi_%E3asévfaaraj£3;/.'::_"§'Laamed Coungei for the petitiener vSLii}i"'I'"1§iC§~*E:§}éi At;§€§a';fV Ef'"«1%§'iymi;'7i.fiiifig the agnpiicatiors is required :9 be :Gnc§:_j§:2e«VdV %..:f1'«.%as"..% "'m.__u<:i*: as sufficient cause is required to be véenétrsghéd' §Ev.S£e€:';:~;ji.E3;f'u:= "V§««£e weuié aiso presg irate Service Ruia 23 3f the Servitg fiuiéfs.
A in 5% far as the Ccnterstégn regarééng candunégag the ' Vfi["u.;§e'Ea~;:§3 €05,-'§€fi.¥D§'§'Eflf ii: E3 rm figuéi: true thaé: guffécéani {gage is (3 required is be mnstrrred liberally, assuming that delay is trjrrdened, we would be putting the dock back '50 2084 and Err as much as rm useful gurgmge weuld be serveé, hence thae qu___estian éf condenirrg the delay wcmld net arise. indeed, thiE:..i{€3r;:;{u.rts would came to the aid sf a Qersorr who lg indelent, Having said $9, we are ef_Jti.a,e3_4\zie§v§""ii§'2--'é~'ii;. Vil'1r:_'..savll;i""
contention faii$.
8. We also note that eve'rl__V'a~:;.sumlrsg: that'riié:1._jrel:3.:lsést off' the petitioner is granted tglwe effr:c:lié:§._;;3e;rsofi5'«a,reV_Vri0t made iaarties to the proceedings." l¥le.rrce;{.,ti1é"ijVi2§§StiQn of interfering with the l:i7}"1fI)LfE§i'3:V€fiC§"V.V'§3l"'Gf:I'i""'v..§C§v§3f'S' not arise. Petition stands rejected, _ V 4 :33 E sggz E3383: