- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18574 WP No. 40547 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 40547 OF 2013 (S-DE) BETWEEN: 1. SRI H. SRINIVASA SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRs. HEMAVATHI C.J W/O LATE SRINIVASA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS 2. PUSHAPALATHA H.S. D/O LATE SRINIVASA AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS 3. BHARGAVI H.S. D/O LATE SRINIVASA AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS ALL ARE R/AT NO.5, 6TH CROSS MARIYAPPANAPALYA, JNANABHARATHI BANGALORE-560056. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. K SRINIVASA., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE COMMANDANT 91 BATTALION CENTRAL RESERVE POLICE FORCE GC LUCKNOW CAMPUS BIJNAPUR, LUCKNOW UTTAR PRADESH-226002. 2. THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE CENTRAL RESERVE POLICE FORCE GROUP CENTRE CRPF YELAHANKA, BANGALORE-64 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. D BASAVARAJA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2) Digitally signed by HEMALATHA A Location: HIGH COURTOF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18574 WP No. 40547 of 2013 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER NO: P.VIII-1/2013-91-EC-II, DATED 12.7.2013 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 VIDE ANNEXURE-D ONLY TO THE EXTENT THE SAME MAKES PETITIONER'S REINSTATEMENT IN SERVICE EFFECTIVE FROM 15.6.2013 AND FURTHER BE PLEASED TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO TREAT THE PETITIONER AS HAVING BEEN REINSTATED INTO SERVICE W.E.F. 21.3.2012 AND TO PAY CONSEQUENT SERVICE AND MONETARY BENEFITS TO THE PETITIONER WITH CURRENT RATE OF INTEREST AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD ORAL ORDER This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 12.07.2013 passed by the first respondent vide Annexure- D, whereby the original petitioner – Srinivasa has been re- instated into service with effect from 15.06.2013 pursuant to the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.9299/2010 dated 21.03.2012. 2. During the pendency of this writ petition, the original petitioner died and his legal representatives have been brought on record. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18574 WP No. 40547 of 2013 3. The brief facts of the case are that the original petitioner was working as a Constable in Central Reserve Service Force from 1988. While in service, he was dismissed from service by order dated 29.06.2002. The original petitioner filed an appeal against the dismissal order, which came to be rejected vide Annexure-A. Being aggrieved by the same, he filed a writ petition before this Court in W.P.No.41532/2002. This Court, by order dated 06.03.2009 remanded the matter back to the appellate authority. The appellate authority, vide order dated 31.07.2009 confirmed the dismissal order passed by the disciplinary authority. Being aggrieved by the same, the original petitioner approached this Court once again by filling a writ petition in W.P.No.9299/2010. This Court, by order dated 21.03.2012, vide Annexure-B, allowed the writ petition by quashing the impugned order passed by the competent authority dated 29.06.2002 and directed the respondents to re-instate the petitioner into service, but without back-wages. Being aggrieved by the same, the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18574 WP No. 40547 of 2013 original petitioner filed W.A.No.2506/2012 and the respondents filed W.A.No.4811/2012. A Division Bench of this Court, by order dated 25.04.2013 dismissed both the appeals. Thereafter, the respondents passed the impugned order dated 12.07.2013 vide Annexure-D, re-instating the petitioner into service with effect from 15.06.2013. 4. The only grievance of the original petitioner is that, this Court, by order dated 21.03.2012 allowed W.P.No.9299/2010, directing the respondents to re-instate the petitioner into service, but without back-wages. But the re-instatement order has been passed on 12.07.2013, after a lapse of one year. As per the directions of this Court, the petitioner could have been re-instated from 21.03.2012. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the writ papers. 6. Even though, this Court, on 21.03.2012 allowed the writ petition and directed the respondents to re-instate - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18574 WP No. 40547 of 2013 the petitioner into service without back-wages, but no time limit has been fixed and also both the petitioner as well as the respondents have filed writ appeals before this Court challenging the order passed by the learned Single Judge. Both the writ appeals are dismissed on 25.04.2013. Immediately after the dismissal of the writ appeals, the respondents passed the impugned order on 12.07.2013 re-instating the petitioner into service with effect from 15.06.2013. 7. In view of the above, there is no error or illegality in the order passed by respondent No.1. Accordingly, the writ petition is devoid of merit and it is dismissed. Sd/- (H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE CM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 64