- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:9430-DB WA No. 47 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. N. V. ANJARIA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT APPEAL NO. 47 OF 2025 (S-KSRTC) BETWEEN: 1. VENKATASWAMY M., S/O. LATE MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS R/AT MELURU - 562 102, CHIKKABALLAPURA TALUK AND DISTRICT. …APPELLANT (BY SRI M. C. BASAVARAJU, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KSRTC CENTRAL OFFICES K.H. ROAD SHANTHINAGARA BANGALORE - 560 027. 2. THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER KSRTC KOLAR DIVISION KOLAR - 563 101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. H.R. RENUKA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND 2) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE PASSED IN WP NO.221/2024 DATED 16/12/2024 AND GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEF OR RELIEFS. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by CHAITHRA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:9430-DB WA No. 47 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA) Heard learned advocate Mr. M.C. Basavaraj for the appellant. 2. The appeal is directed against judgment and order of learned Single Judge dated 16.12.2024, whereby learned Single Judge has dismissed the petition on the ground of delay and laches. 3. The order which was sought to be impugned in the writ petition was dated 26.02.2016 which was a Divisional Establishment Order issued by the Assistant Administrative Officer. The order sought to recover certain amount from the petitioner on the ground that it was wrongly paid. 4. Learned Single Judge, while dismissing the petition observed thus, "In the present case, there is a delay of eight years in making the motion for a writ. There are no reasons for delay of laches. Delay defeats equity and, therefore, where the writ petitioner approaches the - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:9430-DB WA No. 47 of 2025 High Court after a long delay, reliefs prayed for may be denied to him on the grounds of delay and laches irrespective of the fact that they are similarly situated as other candidates who obtained the benefit of the Judgment of the High court in some other cases. The benefit of a judgment is not extended to a case automatically. To conclude, I can say only this much the petitioner approached the Court after a delay, hence, he is not entitled to obtain a discretionary relief." 5. When the memorandum of petition is seen, no averment was found regarding the aspect as to why the petitioner whiled away long eight years before approaching the court by way of writ petition. The only averment is that the representation was made on 15.06.2017 to respondent No.2. Even after the said representation, long seven years have passed and the petitioner was in deep slumber. 5.1 The filing of representation will not in any way lead the case of the petitioner to anywhere insofar as the aspect of delayed approach to the Court is concerned. 5.2 Writ jurisdiction is an equitable jurisdiction. A person who is indolent in asserting his rights would lose right to relief. Unexplained delay of eight years is too long and unreasonable to be countenanced for grant of any relief to the petitioner. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:9430-DB WA No. 47 of 2025 5.3 Learned Single Judge was eminently justified in observing that the delay would disentitle the petitioner to seek any relief and that the benefit of a judgment relied on would not be automatic granted by overlooking the delay. Petitioner was never serious about enforcement of his rights. He slept over for eight years. 6. In the circumstance, no error could be booked in the order of learned Single Judge, interference is not warranted in the appellate jurisdiction. The challenge fails. 7. The appeal is dismissed. Sd/- (N. V. ANJARIA) CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE CR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 36