IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF APRIL 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO. 39648 OF 2014 (GM-CC) BETWEEN:
MRS.M.DEVAKANTHI, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, S. J. POLYTECHNIC, BANGALORE-560 001. … PETITIONER (BY SRI. B.M. IRISHAD AHMED ADV., FOR PETITIONER IS ABSENT) AND:
1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT, BANGALORE-560001.
2. THE DISTRICT SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICER, BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT, BANGALORE-560027.
3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE SOUTH DIVISION, BANGALORE-560001.
4. THE TAHSILDAR, BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK, BANGALORE-560001.
5. THE ADDL. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, CRE CELL, PALACE ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001.
6. THE DIRECTOR, TECHNICAL EDUCATION, PALACE ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001.
… RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SAVITHA T.H. ADV., FOR SRI. C. JAGADISH SPL. COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT.) - - -
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER ANNEX-A, PASSED BY THE R-1 DTD.23.7.2014. AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER None for the petitioner when the matter was taken up at 4.05 p.m.
Smt.Savitha T.H. for Sri.C.Jagadish, learned Special counsel for the respondent.
2. Record perused.
3. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has assailed the validity of the order dated 23.07.2014 passed by Respondent No. 1.
4. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has the remedy of filing an appeal before the District Caste Verification Committee under Section 4-D of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes (Reservation of Appointments, etc) Act, 1990.
5. In view of the aforesaid submission and in view of the efficacious alternative remedy, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to take recourse to alternate remedy of filing an appeal. Needless to state that in case, the petitioner files an appeal within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today, the aforesaid authority shall decide the appeal preferred by the petitioner on merits by invoking the principles contained in Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE SS