- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32003-DB WP No. 11500 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K WRIT PETITION NO. 11500 OF 2026 (S-CAT) BETWEEN: DR. M. RAJESH S/O SHRI. B.G. MOHAN, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/O 193, 10TH CROSS, WILLIAM TOWN, BANGALORE – 560 046. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. TARSEM CHAND GUPTA.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE SECRETARY AND CHAIRMAN, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE, DEFENCE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION, (DRDO), DRDO BHAWAN, RAJAJI MARG, NEW DELHI – 110 011. 2. THE DIRECTOR, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION, DRDO BHAWAN, RAJAJI MARG, NEW DELHI – 110 011. 3. THE DIRECTOR, Digitally signed by NANJUNDACHARI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32003-DB WP No. 11500 of 2026 MINISTRY OF DEFENCE, DEFENCE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION, DR&DO, ARDE, ARMAMENT POST, PASHAN, PUNE – 411 021. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S B TOTAD, CGC) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE PRAYING TO IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND GROUNDS ENUMERATED ABOVE, IT IS MOST RESPECTFULLY PRAYED THAT ORDER DATED 03.01.2025 IN OA No. 240/2021 AND ORDER DATED 09.03.2026 IN R.A. No. 1/2026 PASSED BY THE CAT BENCH BANGALORE (Dr. M MAHESH VS MINISTRY OF DEFENCE AND OTHERS) ANNEXURE-A AND B, RESPECTIVELY, MAY KINDLY BE QUASHED AND SET ASIDE AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT) Petitioner is before this Court, questioning the order dated 03.01.2025 in O.A.No.170/00240/2021 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, Bangalore (for short “CAT”) whereunder, petitioner’s - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32003-DB WP No. 11500 of 2026 prayer for mandamus to the respondents to consider his representations at Annexures-A6 to A13 was dismissed. 2. The petitioner was working as Scientist in the respondent-Defence Research and Development Organization (“DRDO” for short). He was imposed with penalty of compulsory retirement under Order 28.09.2020 and the challenge to the said compulsory retirement was rejected by the CAT by order dated 03.01.2025 in O.A.No.170/00240/2021. 3. The petitioner had approached the CAT in O.A.No.240/2021 seeking for a mandamus to the respondents to consider his representations at Annexures-A6 to A13. 4. We have perused the representations produced at Annexures-A6 to A13 and one of the representation at Annexure-A9 reads as follows: - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32003-DB WP No. 11500 of 2026 18th June 2019 From: Dr.M.Rajesh Sc ‘D’ ARDE – Pashan Pune – 411021. To: The Director Directorate of Personnel Defence Research and Development Organization ‘A’ Block, DRDO Bhawan New Delhi – 110011. Through Proper Chanel SUB: Permission to Assume Charge of Scientist ‘E’/Implementation of Assessment Board Result. REF: Letter No.(1)DOP/05/53000/AB-2012/B-E dated 30 June 2012 (2) My Applications dated 06 May 2016, 27 Feb 2019 & 01 Apr 2019. Respected Sir, Reference is made to the letters cited above and numerous pleas to permit me to assume the charge of scientist ‘E’ and hence implement the assessment board result in accordance with the letter referred at 1 above. 2. More than THREE YEARS have elapsed since a formal request, but till date unfortunately, I have NOT received any response. 3. I once again most humbly request to implement the assessment board result and permit me to assume the charge of scientist ‘E’. 4. I also request to hear me in person. Thanking you, Yours Faithfully (Dr.M.Rajesh) - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32003-DB WP No. 11500 of 2026 A reading of the representations indicate that the petitioner has sought for reporting to duty as Scientist retrospectively 2013. Even though the petitioner was promoted in the year 2013, he has not reported to duty, he remained absent unauthorizedly and he reported back only during 2016. Moreover, when the petitioner has been compulsorily retired and when he is no more in service, request of the petitioner would no more survive for consideration. 4. There is no merit in the writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition stands rejected. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE MPK CT:RK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14