- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19205-DB WP No. 3816 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T.M.NADAF WRIT PETITION NO. 3816 OF 2023 (S-KSAT) BETWEEN: SRI. SHYLAJE GOWDA U C AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS S/O SRI CHALUVE GOWDA SHARAVANA BELAGOLA HASSAN DISTRICT-573135. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRIYANKA S ANGADI, ADV.) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE VIKASA SOUDHA BANGALORE- 560001. 2. THE DIRECTOR HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE SERVICES MAGADI ROAD BANGALORE- 560023. 3. THE CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE SERVICES AROGYA SOUDHA MAGADI ROAD BANGALORE-560023. 4. THE DISTRICT HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE OFFICER Digitally signed by MARIGANGAIAH PREMAKUMARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19205-DB WP No. 3816 of 2023 HASSAN DISTRICT HASSAN -573201. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VIKAS ROJIPURA, AGA FOR R1 TO R4) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 07.12.2022 IN A.NO-4720/2021 (ANNEXURE-A) AND ALLOW A.NO-4720/2021 AND B) ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRITS/ORDERS/DIRECTIONS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO REQULARIZE THE SERVICE OF THE PETITIONER, CONSEQUENTLY GIVE PROMOTION FROM TIME TO TIME INCREMENTS TILL THE DATE HE RETIRES AND PENSIONS/ POST RETIREMENT FINANCIAL BENEFITS IN PAR WITH OTHER SIMILARLY PLACED EMPLOYEES WITHIN STIPULATED PERIOD OF 3 TO 6 MONTHS. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T.M.NADAF ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT) This writ petition challenges the order dated 07.12.2022 in Application No.4720/2021 on the file of the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal at Bengaluru (for short, ‘Tribunal) whereunder the petitioner’s application questioning the endorsement dated 29.09.2010; endorsement dated 02.08.2021, is rejected on the ground that the petitioner has not filed application for - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19205-DB WP No. 3816 of 2023 condonattion of delay and further with an observation that the petitioner has not challenged the impugned endorsement dated 29.09.2010. 2. Heard learned counsel Smt.Priyanka S. Angadi for petitioner and learned Additional Government Advocate Sri.Vikas Rojipura for respondent Nos.1 to 4. Perused the entire writ petition papers. 3. Though learned counsel for the petitioner has urged several grounds including on merits, on going through the impugned order passed by the Tribunal, we are of the considered opinion that the observation of the Tribunal that the petitioner has not filed application for condonation of delay as well as the petitioner has not challenged endorsement dated 29.09.2010 is against the records. 4. On going through the writ petition records, we find that the petitioner has filed application – I.A dated 07.10.2021 under Section 21 of the Administrative - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19205-DB WP No. 3816 of 2023 Tribunals Act, 1985 (for short, ‘1985 Act’) praying to condone the delay in filing the application. Further, on going through the application filed before the Tribunal, it is seen that the prayer of the petitioner is to set aside the endorsement dated 29.09.2010 (nnexure-A22) along with endorsement dated 02.08.2021 (Annexure-A28). Further, the preamble of the impugned order also indicates the prayer of the petitioner. However, the Tribunal without noticing the application filed for condonation of delay and without noticing the fact that the petitioner had questioed the endorsement dated 29.09.2010, proceeded to dismiss the application, with an observation that application for constitution of delay is not filed and endorsement dated 29.09.2010 is not challenged, which is wholly erroneous and opposed to records. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the question of filing application for condonatoin of delay would not arise since in the facts and circumstances, there is no delay. It is for the petitioner to convince the Tribunal - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19205-DB WP No. 3816 of 2023 with regard to delay or as submitted, the question of delay would not arise. 6. In the above circumstances, the following: ORDER a) Writ petition is allowed. b) Impugned order dated 07.12.2022 in Application No.4720/2021 on the file of the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal at Bengaluru is set aside and the application is remitted back to the Tribunal for fresh consideration. c) The Tribunal shall take note of the fact of challenge to endorsement dated 29.09.2010 as well as I.A for condonation of delay filed under Section 21 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 and dispose of the matter in accordance with law. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19205-DB WP No. 3816 of 2023 d) The Tribunal is requested to endeavor for early disposal of the application since it is submitted that the petitioner has retired from service. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE NC CT:bms List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27