- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47031-DB WP No. 17786 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF WRIT PETITION NO. 17786 OF 2025 (S-KSAT) BETWEEN: THE ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR (ENQUIRIES-10), KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA, M.S. BUILDINGS, BANGALORE -560 001. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. JOSEPH ANTHONY, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, KARNATAKA PUBLIC WORKS, PORTS, AND INLAND WATER TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001. 3. SRI. DR D. S DEVARAJ, ASSISTANT ENGINEER, WARD NO.66 SUBRAMANAYA NAGAR, BBMP, BANGALORE - 560 010. 4. SRI M.K NANJAIAH, ASSIATANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, Digitally Signed by REKHA R Location : High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47031-DB WP No. 17786 of 2025 MALLESHWARAM SUB DIVISION, BBMP, BANGALORE - 560 003. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.VIKAS ROJIPURA, AGA FOR R1 AND R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO a) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF A WRIT THEREBY QUASHING THE ORDER DATED JULY 28, 2020 IN APPLICATIONS BEARING No. 6246-47/2019 (ANNEXURE-A). THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF) The Additional Registrar (Enquiries-10), Karnataka Lokayukta - respondent No.2 in Application No.6246 & 6247/2019 is in petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, calling in question the Order dated 28.07.2020 passed by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal at Bengaluru, (‘Tribunal’ for short). The Tribunal by the impugned order stated supra allowed the application - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47031-DB WP No. 17786 of 2025 and set-aside the orders dated 26.10.2016 and 22.12.2016 (Annexures-A11 and A13) passed by the third respondent. 2. The parties are referred to as per their rankings before the Tribunal. 3. A brief outline of facts leading to filing of the present petition are as under:- On a complaint by one Mr.Purushotham.K dated 27.05.2014 to the Karnataka Lokayukta against the applicants alleging that the applicants have not taken any action with respect to house bearing number 2535, 10th Main, ‘E’ block, 2nd stage, Rajajinagar, Ward No.66, Bengaluru, as per the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1976 (‘KMC Act’ for short) by receiving illegal gratification from the opponent. The Karnataka Lokayukta upon receipt of the complaint, submitted a report under Section 12(3) of the Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984 (for short 'the Act of 1984') to the Government seeking to entrust the departmental enquiry. The Government upon the report, passed an order of entrustment of enquiry under Rule 14-A of the Karnataka - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47031-DB WP No. 17786 of 2025 Civil Service (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957 (‘CCA Rules, 1957’ for short). Aggrieved by the order of entrustment, the applicants were before the Tribunal in Application No.6246 and 6247/2019. The respondent State Authorities as well as Karnataka Lokaytha appeared on accepting notice and opposed the application. The Tribunal upon consideration of the material placed before it and the rival submissions made by the parties, found that applicants have approached the Tribunal earlier seeking to quash the articles of charge. The Tribunal by its order dated 17.07.2019 allowed the application quashing the articles of charge issued by the Karnataka Lokayukta. Having considered this aspect of the matter, the Tribunal held that the order of entrustment will not sustain. Having done so, the Tribunal proceeded to allow the application and quashed the orders impugned stated supra, by its order dated 28.07.2020. It is this Order passed by the Tribunal is - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47031-DB WP No. 17786 of 2025 called in question by the Karnataka Lokayukta in this petition belatedly by four years eleven months. 4. Heard Sri.Joseph Anthony, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Vikas Rojipura., learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 2. Perused the entire writ papers. 5. On a query regarding the explanation for the delay caused in filing the writ petition belatedly by four years eleven months, Mr.Anthony is unable to place any suggestible/palpable explanation for the delay caused in filing the petition belatedly. In these circumstances, the writ petition is hit not only by delay but by laches too. The doctrine of delay and laches should not be brushed aside lightly. The writ Court, while exercising the power under Article 226 is called upon to weigh the explanation offered and the acceptability of the same, since the pivotal amplification is it is exercising an extraordinary jurisdiction. 6. The petitioner is not an exception to the case, when there is delay and laches in approaching the Court, - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47031-DB WP No. 17786 of 2025 than a citizen - party/litigant. The delay does bring in hazard and causes injury to the lis as the delay defeats all the rights. On scrutiny of the entire case papers, we find no reason to condone the enormous delay. This Court, if it ignores the obvious and enormous delay, will foster injustice, as it is likely to affect others. A finality attained cannot be permitted to be reopened if there is unreasonable lapse of time. The unexplained delay of four years eleven months is fatal to the case. On this count alone, the writ petition is liable to be rejected and is accordingly, rejected. Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE TKN List No.: 2 Sl No.: 7