IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2017 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. H.G.RAMESH ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.33672/2017 (S-KAT) BETWEEN:
SHRI SURESH S/O VENKATAPPA AGED 54 YEARS POLICE CONSTABLE GORUR POLICE STATION HASSAN DISTRICT, HASSAN PRESENTLY WORKING AS HEAD CONSTABLE JAYANAGARA POLICE STATION SHIVAMOGGA-577201 ...PETITIONER (BY SRI MANJUNATHA RAO BHONSLE, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (TRAINING) MEMBER SECRETARY PSTS RECRUITMENT COMMITTEE CARLTON HOUSE, PALACE ROAD BENGALURU-560 001 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL AND INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BENGALURU-560 001 3. SRI H.G.MAHESH POLICE SUB-INSPECTOR HONNAVALLI POLICE STATION TUMAKURU DISTRICT- 572 101 4. SRI C.M.THIMMA SETTY POLICE SUB-INSPECTOR BINDIGANAVALE POLICE STATION MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 802 ...RESPONDENTS (GA SD) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER IN A.NO.1934 OF 2008 DTD.28.4.2017 VIDE ANNEX-D PASSED BY THE KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL AND FURTHER TO ALLOW THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Ag.CJ (Oral):
1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 28.04.2017 passed by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore dismissing the petitioner’s application in Application No.1934/2008 on the ground of delay of three years in filing the application.
2. We have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and perused the record.
3. In the aforesaid application, the petitioner had challenged his non selection as a Sub-Inspector of Police in the final selection list dated 28.10.2013.
4. The Administrative Tribunal has dismissed the application with the following reasons:
“15. ………… Since the applicant has not explained the delay from 28.10.2003 till the legal notice dated 21.07.2006, the grievance of the applicant cannot be considered since the selected candidates have already joined service and they have completed their basic and practical training and presently they are working as independent PSIs. In view of the judgement in the case of Rajendra Singh’s case, the impugned orders cannot be considered as illegal and arbitrary. The Division Bench of the Hon’ble High Court of Rajastan (Jodhpur) in Rajendra Singh’s case has held:
“Once appointments are made interests of appointed candidates come into play. When the number of seats are limited, relief cannot be given to any Petitioner without displacing a candidate who has already joined. It was further held that “a finality is to be attached to the selection process, it cannot be allowed to remain open and continuing. Selection process has a life and it cannot be extended except as permitted by relevant service rules.”
16. For the foregoing reasons, in the facts and circumstances of this case, the applicant has failed to establish that he is entitled for the relief as prayed for to quash the impugned orders and to seek for a direction to the respondents for selection and appointment to the post of PSI under 2A/Rural/KMS in the final select list dated 28.10.2003. Only on the ground of belated claim for selection after lapse of 2½ years cannot be considered. IA-I for condonation of delay of 3 years in filing the application is rejected, consequently, the main application is dismissed.”
5. On the facts stated above, we find no ground to interfere with the order of the Administrative Tribunal in exercise of the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.
Petition dismissed.
Sd/-
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- JUDGE KSR