- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:12410 WP No. 5593 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 5593 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: SRI. PARSHURAM, S/O VASANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS RESIDING AT E/63, GEDDALAMARI TANDA, YADGIRI, KARNATAKA - 585 291, REGISTRATION NUMBER - 241031573. ALSO AT NO.40/1, BANGALORE MAHANAGAR PALIKE HBCS LAYOUT, 2ND STAGE, CHANDRA LAYOUT, BENGALURU - 560 040. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. PREETHI G., ADVOCATE) AND: KARNATAKA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, UDAYOGA SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. SUNIL KUMAR H., ADVOCATE) THE W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:12410 WP No. 5593 of 2025 RESPONDENT TO CONSIDER THE PETITIONERS REPRESENTATION DATED 13.02.2025 (ANNX-H AND H1). THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER The petitioner is before this Court, seeking the following prayers: "a. Issue a Writ of Mandamus/Order/Direction directing the respondent to consider the Petitioner's representation Dated: 13.02.2025 (Annexure-H and H1). b. Issue any other relief/s as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of this case including costs, in the interests of justice and equity." 2. Heard Smt. Preethi G., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri. Sunil Kumar H., learned counsel appearing for the respondent and have perused the material on record. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent would submit that the representation of the petitioner has met its consideration and has been communicated to the candidate as well. The remedy to the petitioner for the consideration of - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:12410 WP No. 5593 of 2025 the representation even is before the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal. Now that representation is considered and rejected, the jurisdiction to answer the contentions of the petitioner would lie only with the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal. 4. In the light of the judgment of Apex Court in the case of L. CHANDRA KUMAR v. UNION OF INDIA1, where the Seven Judge Bench of the Apex Court has held that the Tribunal is the Court of first instance in cases of the kind that is now projected in the case at hand. 5. Reserving liberty to the petitioner to approach the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal for redressal of the grievance, the petition stands disposed. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE SJK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21/CT: BHK 1 AIR 1997 SC 1125