Shri. P Rajanna vs The Director (Admn And Hrd)
2022 Latest Caselaw 11385 Kant

                           1
     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

        DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2022

                       PRESENT

             THE HON'BLE MR. ALOK ARADHE
                 ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

                         AND

     THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY

         WRIT APPEAL NO.1323/2021(S-RES)

BETWEEN:

SHRI P. RAJANNA
S/O LATE SRI PAPAIAH
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
OCCUPATION RETIRED IN SERVICE
R/AT NO.100, 1ST MAIN ROAD
1ST STAGE, KHB COLONY
BASAVESHWARANGAR
BENGALURU - 560 079.                    ...APPELLANT

(BY SRI GANAPATHI SUBBARAYA BHAT, ADV.)

AND:

1.     THE DIRECTOR (ADMN & HRD)
       KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION
       COMPANY LTD (KPTCL)
       CORPORATE OFFICE
       CAUVERY BHAVAN
       BENGALURU - 560 009.

2.     THE SUPERINTENDENT OF ENGINEER
       BENGALURU ELECTRICRT SUPPLY
       COMAPNY LTD (BESCOM)
       EAST CIRCLE, BEHIND JAHANGIR
       MOHALLA, TUSKER TOWN
       SHIVAJINAGAR
       BENGALURU - 560 001.
                           2
3.   THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELE)
     THE BENGALURU ELECTRICAL SUPPLY
     COMPANY LTD (BESCOM)
     VIDHANA SOUDHA DIVISION
     CRESCENT ROAD
     BENGALURU - 560 001.            ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. RAKSHITHA D.J, ADV., FOR R-1 TO R-3)

     THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER DATED 21.10.2020 PASSED IN WRIT PETITION
NO.37592/2014 (S-RES) BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF
THIS HON'BLE COURT AND TO ALLOW THE WRIT PETITION
NO.37592/2014 (S-RES).

     THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
THIS DAY, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE, DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:

                    JUDGMENT

This intra court appeal has been filed against the

order dated 21.10.2020 passed by the learned Single

Judge, by which, the claim of the petitioner for grant of

two additional increments has been dismissed on the

ground that the same suffers from laches.

2. Facts giving rise to the filing of this appeal

briefly stated are, that the appellant had acquired

Masters Degree through open university. He made a

claim for grant of two additional increments, which was

rejected on 04.10.2000. However, the appellant did not

question the same. The appellant again made a stale

claim for grant of two additional increments, which was

again rejected by order dated 28.02.2014. Thereafter,

the appellant filed the writ petition.

3. The writ petition has been dismissed on the

ground that his entitlement for grant of two additional

increments was adjudicated way back in the year 2000

and the petitioner failed to question the same.

4. We have heard the learned Counsel for the

appellant at length.

5. Learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that

an assurance was given by the respondents that the

benefit of two additional increments shall be accorded to

the appellant.

6. There is no explanation for the delay caused in

making the stale claim. It is settled law that this Court in

exercise of its extraordinary powers under Article 226 of

the Constitution of India, does not adjudicate the stale

claim. We, therefore, do not find any ground to differ

with the view taken by the learned Single Judge.

In the result, the appeal fails and the same is

hereby dismissed.

Sd/-

ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

Sd/-

JUDGE

KK