- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2935-DB RP No. 590 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI REVIEW PETITION NO. 590 OF 2024 BETWEEN: MANJUNATH I PUJAR S/O SHRI ISHWARAPPA PUJAR, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/O S-77, GOLDEN ENCLAVE, OLD AIRPORT ROAD, BANGALORE-560017. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. TARSEM CHAND GUPTA, ADV. (THROUGH VC)) AND: 1. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI-110001. 2. CHAIRMAN, CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI – 110001. 3. PR. CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, Digitally signed by NANJUNDACHARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2935-DB RP No. 590 of 2024 KARNATAKA AND GOA REGION, C.R. BUILDING, BANGALORE-560001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B PRAMOD, CGC FOR R1 TO R3) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF CPC, 1908 PRAYING TO (I) HENCE IN VIEW OF SUBMISSION MADE ABOVE IT IS RESPECTFULLY PRAYED THAT THE ORDER DATED 08.11.2024 IN WP 23768/2024 REFERRED ABOVE MAY KINDLY BE REVIEWED AND ERRORS APPARENT MAY KINDLY BE CORRECTED, BACK WAGES ALLOWED WITH INTEREST FOR THE UNEXPLAINED INORDINATE DELAY, SO AS TO SUB SERVE THE CAUSE OF JUSTICE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT) Learned counsel Sri. Tarsem Chand Gupta appears for the petitioner through video conference. 2. Heard. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2935-DB RP No. 590 of 2024 3. This review petition is directed against the order dated 08.11.2024 passed in W.P.No.23768/2024 praying to review the portion of the order whereby back wages is denied by granting relief to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that while allowing the writ petition, petitioner could not have denied back wages since for no fault of petitioner, the petitioner was denied promotion while promoting his juniors to the next higher cadre. 4. On hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and on perusal of the order passed by this Court, we are of the considered view that no error apparent on the face of the record so as to review the portion of the order denying back wages to the petitioner is pointed out. While directing retrospective promotion, conscious decision is taken to deny back wages, which cannot be termed as an error. The grounds urged by the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:2935-DB RP No. 590 of 2024 petitioner to review the order are not the grounds on which review could be made. Accordingly, review petition stands rejected. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (C M JOSHI) JUDGE BSV CT:bms List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6