- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46023-DB WA No. 1548 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND WRIT APPEAL No. 1548 OF 2012 (S-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI S. SATYANARAYANA, S/O SRI B. V. SRIKANTHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, MANAGER, RESERVE BANK OF INDIA, (NOW RETIRED FROM SERVICE) AND RESIDING AT FLAT No.003, POORNA PALACE APARTMENTS, J.P.NAGAR, BANGALORE-78. …APPELLANT (BY SRI THILAK RAJ S.V., & SMT. SHWETHA RANI, ADVOCATES FOR SRI H. N. BASAVARAJU, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE RESERVE BANK OF INDIA, REP.BY ITS GOVERNOR, CENTRAL OFFICE, MUMBAI-400001. 2. THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR, RESERVE BANK OF INDIA, GENERAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT, 10/3/8, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, Digitally signed by VALLI MARIMUTHU Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46023-DB WA No. 1548 of 2012 POST BOX No.5467, BANGALORE-01. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI G.L. VISHWANATH, SENIOR ADVOCATE A/W SMT. DHRITI VISHWANATH, ADVOCATE AND SRI SUHAS SHYLENDRA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED IN THE WRIT PETITION No.305/2008 DATED 06/03/2012. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI) The instant appeal, which is of the year 2012, is listed for final hearing today. 2. This appeal has been filed seeking to set aside the order dated 06.03.2012 made in W.P.No.305/2008 (S-RES) and for granting the appellant all the reliefs as prayed for. 3. Sri S.V. Thilak Raj [Enrollment No.KAR.4520/2023] and Smt. Shwetha Rani [Enrollment No.KAR.3741/2024], the proxy - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46023-DB WA No. 1548 of 2012 counsel of Sri H.N. Basavaraju, the learned counsel for the appellant, seek an adjournment on the ground that the appellant wants to engage the services of another counsel. 4. We have perused the order sheet of the case. 5. This case is being adjourned time and again on behalf of the appellant. On 10.03.2023, the appellant appeared in- person and submitted that he had engaged the services of a learned Senior counsel, who is hospitalized, and therefore, sought an adjournment. Again on 30.03.2023, a similar request was made by the learned counsel Sri M. Subramanya Bhat for an adjournment on the ground of hospitalization of the learned Senior counsel. When the matter was listed on 18.04.2023, an adjournment was sought on the same ground. On 26.06.2025, a memo was filed by the learned counsel Sri M. Subramanya Bhat seeking leave to retire from the case. He was permitted to do so and the case was directed to be listed for hearing on top of the hearing list. 6. On 03.07.2025, the learned counsel Sri S.V. Thilak Raj appeared on behalf of the appellant's counsel - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46023-DB WA No. 1548 of 2012 Sri H.N. Basavaraju and undertook to appear and argue the appeal and, therefore, the case was adjourned. On 10.07.2025 again the learned Senior counsel Sri M.R. Rajagopal sought time on behalf of appellant's counsel Sri H.N. Basavaraju, which was reluctantly allowed by the Court. On 03.09.2025, the learned counsel Smt. Manasa B Rao, stated that she had instructions on behalf of respondent No.1 to file vakalat in the instant case and sought an adjournment. An adjournment was also sought on behalf of the appellant and, therefore, the adjournment was granted. When the matter was next listed on 29.10.2025, the following order was passed; " On the joint request of the learned counsel for the parties, list the matter on 12.11.2025 with the undertaking that the matter will not be adjourned when is listed next." 7. Now, a request has been made for an adjournment on the ground that a Senior counsel is to be engaged in the matter by the appellant, who is present in Court. We requested the learned counsel to proceed with the arguments of the case, but he expressed his inability to do so. Therefore, we decline to adjourn the hearing of the matter. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46023-DB WA No. 1548 of 2012 8. The writ appeal is, therefore, dismissed for want of prosecution. Sd/- (JAYANT BANERJI) JUDGE Sd/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE MV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7