Karnataka High Court
Smt. T. Prema vs The State Of Karnataka on 21 September, 2023
Bench: Chief Justice, Krishna S Dixit
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:34198-DB
WA No. 884 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR PRASANNA B. VARALE, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT
WRIT APPEAL NO. 884 OF 2023 (S-RES)
BETWEEN:
SMT. T. PREMA,
W/O G. THIPPAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,
R/OF NO.754, 6TH WARD,
NAYAKANAHATTY,
CHALLAKERE TALUK,
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577 536.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. BALARAJ A C.,ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed AND:
by SHARADA
VANI B 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
Location: HIGH REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
COURT OF DEPARTMENT OF WOMEN &
KARNATAKA CHILD WELFARE DEPARTMENT,
M.S.BUILDING,
DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU-560 001.
2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR
WOMEN AND CHILD
WELFARE DEVELOPMENT,
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT,
CHITRADURGA-577 501.
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:34198-DB
WA No. 884 of 2023
3. THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT
PROJECT OFFICER AND
MEMBER SECRETARY
CHALLAKERE TALUK,
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577 522.
4. SMT. H SHYLA
W/O HONNURAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS,
R/AT WARD NO.6,
NEAR HOSPITAL,
NAYAKANAHATTY,
CHITRADURGA TALUK,
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577 536.
ACTUALLY R/OF WARD NO.8,
GOVERNMENT KANNADA MODEL
HIGHER PRIMARY SCHOOL,
A K COLONY,
NAYAKANAHATTI,
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577 536.
...RESPONDENTS
THIS WRIT APPEAL FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
JUDGEMENT PASSED IN W.P. No. 4097 OF 2022 Dt 12.4.2023
AND ALLOW THE ABOVE WRIT PETITION BY GRANTING THE
RELIEFS AS PRAYED FOR, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND
EQUITY.
THIS WRIT APPEAL COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, CHIEF JUSTICE DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC:34198-DB
WA No. 884 of 2023
JUDGMENT
This intra court appeal by the unsuccessful writ
petitioner seeks to call in question a learned Single Judge's
order in her W.P.No.4097/2022, wherein a challenge was
laid to the selection of 4th respondent herein as
Anganawadi Worker. Learned counsel appearing for the
appellant argues that the learned Single Judge grossly
erred in denying relief to his client and therefore his order
be set at naught.
2. Having heard the counsel for the appellant and
having perused the appeal papers, we decline indulgence
in the matter broadly agreeing with the reasoning of the
learned Single Judge in denying relief. Mainly he has
given two reasons: Firstly, the appellant has not disputed
that the 4th Respondent is the ordinary resident of Ward
No.6. Therefore she has every right to be in the fray of
selection to the post in question going by the Recruitment
Notification 08.07.2019. Secondly, the final selection was
made way back on 27.06.2021 and the appellant had not
NC: 2023:KHC:34198-DB
WA No. 884 of 2023
filed any objection to the Provisional Select List. No
explanation is offered as to why she did not do that.
Added to all this, the writ petition itself was filed after
brooking unreasonable delay with no plausible explanation
therefor. It hardly needs to be stated that law does not
come to the aid of tardy & indolent.
In the above circumstances, this writ appeal being
unworthy of merits is liable to be and accordingly rejected
in limine.
Sd/-
CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/-
JUDGE
Snb/
