IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE R. DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO.2474/2019 (S – RES) BETWEEN:
Rekha T.V., Aged about 28 years, D/o. Venkatachalaiah, C/o. Devaraj, No.643, 5th Block, Sri M.V. Layout, Bengaluru – 560 056. ...Petitioner (By Sri M.T.Nanaiah, Advocate for Sri Prabhugoud B.Tumbigi, Advocate) AND:
1. State of Karnataka By its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Vidhana Soudha, Bengaluru – 560 001.
2. The Civil Police Constable Recruitment Committee, Rep. by Deputy Inspector General of Police and Member Secretary, Carlton House, Palace Road, Bengaluru – 560 001.
3. The Additional Director General of Police Recruitment, Carlton House, Palace Road, Bengaluru – 560 001. …Respondents (By Smt. M.S. Prathima, AGA) This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India praying to declare serial No.18(S); Misdemeanor-Clause in the notification dated 21.06.2018 passed in vide Annexure-B by the respondents as ultra- virus to the Constitution of India.
This writ petition is coming on for Orders this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R The petitioner has applied for the post of Civil Police Constable in pursuance of notification issued at Annexure-B dated 21.06.2018. In the process of petitioner taking examination, the impugned order has been passed by the Additional Director General of Police at Annexure-A dated 10.12.2018, permanently debarring the petitioner and other 119 persons from applying for any post in the police department. Being aggrieved, the petitioner is before this Court.
2. Learned Additional Government Advocate submits that the jurisdiction questioning the impugned order lies before the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal.
Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has called in question the vires of Condition 18(S) imposed in the notification at Annexure- B as ultra-vires the Constitution of India. Therefore, the Administrative Tribunal may not have the jurisdiction to entertain this petition.
3. Learned AGA has placed reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Chandra Kumar Vs. Union of India reported in AIR 1997 SC 1125. It is pointed out from the conclusive portion of the judgment of the Apex Court wherein, it has been held that the Tribunals created under Article 323A and Article 323B of the Constitution are possessed of the competence to test the constitutional validity of statutory provisions and rules.
4. In the light of the above, the petition deserves to be dismissed on the ground of availability of alternative remedy to the petitioner. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to approach the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal to redress her grievance.
Original order at Annexure-A may be returned to the petitioner by retaining a copy of the same.
SD/- JUDGE PN/-