S Jahnavi vs Union Public Service Commission
2022 Latest Caselaw 10736 Kant

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

         DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JULY, 2022

                       PRESENT

          THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. VEERAPPA

                         AND

        THE HON'BLE Mrs. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

         WRIT PETITION NO.12866/2022 (S-CAT)


BETWEEN:

S. JAHNAVI,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
WORKING AS JOINT DIRECTOR (ADMN),
FORENSIC SCIENCE LAB,
MADIWALA,
BANGALORE - 560 068.
                                        ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI P.S. RAJAGOPAL, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
    SRI IRISHAD AHMED B.M., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     UNION PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION,
       REP. BY ITS SECRETARY,
       DHOLPUR HOUSE,
       SHAHJAHAN ROAD,
       NEW DELHI - 110 069.

2.     THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
       REP. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY,
       DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL
       ADMINISTRATIVE AND REFORMS,
                         -2-




     VIDHANA SOUDHA,
     BANGALORE - 560 001.

3.   THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
     REP. BY ITS ADDITIONAL
     CHIEF SECRETARY,
     HOME DEPARTMENT,
     VIDHANA SOUDHA,
     BANGALURU - 560 001.
                                     ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI T.P. SRINIVAS, PRL. GOVT ADVOCATE FOR R2
AND R3)

                       ****

     THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO 1.
ISSUE A WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF
MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE
TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE BENCH TO PRONOUNCE THE
ORDERS ON O.A. NO.450/2021 RESERVED ON 26/10/2021
VIDE ANNEXURE-D, WITHIN A TIME FRAME SPECIFIED BY
THIS HON'BLE COURT. 2. PASS SUCH OTHER ORDER.



     THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS,
THIS DAY, B.VEERAPPA J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
                             -3-


                          ORDER

The petitioner has filed the present writ petition

for a writ of mandamus directing the Central

Administrative Tribunal to pronounce the orders in

O.A. No.450/2021 reserved on 26.10.2021 as per

Annexure-D within a time frame specified by this

Court.

2. If the Tribunal after hearing both the

parties has reserved the matter on 26.10.2021 for

orders and the Tribunal has not pronounced the

judgment within the time stipulated, it is always open

for the petitioner to file necessary application before

the Tribunal and the it is for Tribunal to pass

appropriate orders in accordance with law.

3. In view of the above, this Court cannot

issue a writ of mandamus as sought for in order to

maintain Judicial propriety. Accordingly, the writ

petition is disposed off.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

MBM