Nithyananda. K vs The Principle Secretary on 5 November, 2020

[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Nithyananda. K vs The Principle Secretary on 5 November, 2020

Bench: S.G.Pandit

                         1



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

     DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2020

                      BEFORE

         THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT

       WRIT PETITION NO.49308 OF 2017 (S-DIS)

BETWEEN:

NITHYANANDA K
S/O LATE Y.K. ANCHAN,
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
RES. AT SHIRNIDHI HOUSE,
PANIYOOR POST,
BELAPU VILLAGE,
UDUPI TALUK & DISTRICT.
                                    ... PETITIONER

(BY SMT. M.C.NAGASHREE, ADVOCATE-ABSENT)


AND:

1.     THE PRINCIPLE SECRETARY
       HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT
       VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001

2.     THE COMMISSIONER
       HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE SERVICES
       ANDRAO CIRCLE, BENGALURU - 560 002.

3.     THE DIRECTOR
       HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT
       ANDRAO CIRCLE, BENGALURU - 560 002.
                                 2




4.   DISTRICT HEALTH OFFICER
     HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT
     DAKSHINA KANNADA, MANGALORE - 575 001.

                                            ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. SRIDHAR N.HEGDE, HCGP)

     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING
TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.1 TO CONSIDER
THE REVIEW PETITION DATED 21.04.2005 PENDING
BEFORE AS PER ANNEXURE-H.

    THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR
PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP THIS DAY,
THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE, THE COURT MADE
THE FOLLOWING:

                           ORDER

The petitioner who was working as a Pharmacist in the Department of Health and Family Welfare Department-respondent No.3 is before this Court seeking for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to consider the review petition dated 21.04.2005 at Annexure-H. 3

2. No representation for petitioner. Even on earlier occasion there was no representation for petitioner.

3. Heard Sri. Sridhar N. Hegde, learned HCGP for respondents.

4. The writ petition papers would reveal that the petitioner was working as a Pharmacist in Health and Family Welfare Department-respondent No.3. By order dated 27.03.2002 as per Annexure-D the petitioner was dismissed from service under Rule 8 of KCS (CCA) Rules 1957. Against which the petitioner filed an appeal before the first respondent. The said appeal is also dismissed as per Annexure-E dated 30.04.2003. Thereafter, the petitioner is said to have filed Review Petition as per Annexure-H dated 21.04.2005. It is the grievance of the petitioner that the said Review Petition is not disposed of till the date of filing of the writ petition.

5. Admittedly, petitioner was a Government servant. Since he was working as Pharmacist in the department of Health and Family Welfare Department- respondent No.3. For redressal of grievance of Government servants special forum is created under Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. The petitioner ought to have approached the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal by filing application under Section 19 of the Act. When a special forum is created under a statute, it may not be proper for this Court to entertain the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. No useful purpose would be served by keeping the writ petition pending.

For the reasons stated above, writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal.

Sd/-

JUDGE pgg/gpg

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court