Dismissed¶8

Sri S Satyanarayana v. the Reserve Bank of India

Karnataka HC12 Nov 2025WA/1548/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ appeal (service matter, S-RES) by retired RBI Manager against RBI; filed under S. 4, Karnataka High Court Act, challenging order dated 06.03.2012 in W.P.No.305/2008; dismissed for want of prosecution on 12.11.2025 after repeated adjournments, counsel's retirement, and breach of no-further-adjournment undertaking; adjournment refused despite presence of appellant in Court; no merits decided, no case law cited; useful as authority on refusal of serial adjournments and dismissal for want of prosecution.

What did the court decide?

Despite a fresh request for adjournment (to engage a Senior counsel) and counsel's expressed inability to argue, the Court declined to adjourn the hearing, the matter having already been adjourned time and again contrary to the undertaking of 29.10.2025. ¶7

Sri S Satyanarayana Vs the Reserve Bank of India — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:46023-DB WA No. 1548 of 2012

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI

¶7

AND

¶8

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND

¶9

WRIT APPEAL No. 1548 OF 2012 (S-RES)

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

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.

¶12

…APPELLANT

¶13

Digitally signed by VALLI MARIMUTHU

¶14

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

(BY SRI THILAK RAJ S.V., & SMT. SHWETHA RANI, ADVOCATES FOR SRI H. N. BASAVARAJU, ADVOCATE)

¶16

AND:

¶17

THE RESERVE BANK OF INDIA, REP.BY ITS GOVERNOR, CENTRAL OFFICE, MUMBAI-400001.

¶18

THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR, RESERVE BANK OF INDIA, GENERAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT, 10/3/8, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD,

¶19

¶20

NC: 2025:KHC:46023-DB WA No. 1548 of 2012

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

POST BOX No.5467, BANGALORE-01.

¶23

…RESPONDENTS

¶24

(BY SRI G.L. VISHWANATH, SENIOR ADVOCATE A/W SMT. DHRITI VISHWANATH, ADVOCATE AND SRI SUHAS SHYLENDRA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2)

¶25

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.

¶26

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶27

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND

¶28

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶29

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI)

¶30

The instant appeal, which is of the year 2012, is listed for

¶31

final hearing today.

¶32

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

¶33

granting the appellant all the reliefs as prayed for.

¶34

Sri S.V. Thilak Raj [Enrollment No.KAR.4520/2023] and

¶35

Smt. Shwetha Rani [Enrollment No.KAR.3741/2024], the proxy

¶36

¶37

NC: 2025:KHC:46023-DB WA No. 1548 of 2012

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

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.

¶40

We have perused the order sheet of the case.

¶41

This case is being adjourned time and again on behalf of the appellant. On 10.03.2023, the appellant appeared inperson 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.

¶42

On 03.07.2025, the learned counsel Sri S.V. Thilak Raj appeared on behalf of the appellant's counsel

¶43

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:46023-DB WA No. 1548 of 2012

¶44

HC-KAR

¶45

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;

¶46

" 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."

¶47

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.

¶48

¶49

NC: 2025:KHC:46023-DB WA No. 1548 of 2012

¶50

HC-KAR

¶51