Dismissed¶¶29

H S Vamana Murthy v. Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal

Karnataka HC8 Apr 2025WP/25162/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru; WP No. 25162 of 2024 (S-KSAT); decided 08-04-2025; bench Krishna S Dixit J and Ramachandra D. Huddar J; writ under Articles 226 and 227 Constitution of India against Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal (Registrar); mandamus sought to compel disposal of M.A.No.01/2023; successive miscellaneous applications; abuse of discretion/jurisdiction; culpable conduct of party-in-person; penalty order; failure to pay costs; petition dismissed; no precedent cited.

What did the court decide?

The contention that a citizen has a right to move any number of Miscellaneous Applications and that the Tribunal must pass orders on their merits is too broad a proposition to be agreed with. ¶¶23

H S Vamana Murthy Vs Karnataka State… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

1 - NC: 2025:KHC:14897-DB WP No. 25162 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT

¶5

AND

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR WRIT PETITION NO. 25162 OF 2024 (S-KSAT)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

H S VAMANA MURTHY, S/O LATE H N SUNDARA ACHARAYA, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, SURVEYOR THE TAHSILDAR, MANGALORE TALUK, MANGALORE (D K) R/AT NO.SY.81, RR NO.AEH 2491, 4^TH MAIN, 5^TH CROSS, P.C. EXTENSION, KOLAR-563 101.

¶9

…PETITIONER (BY SRI.H S VAMANA MURTHY.,PARTY-IN-PERSON)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by CHETAN B C Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, KANDAYA BHAVAN, 7^TH FLOOR, K.G.ROAD, BENGALURU-560 009.

¶13

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI. SHREEDHAR B G., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. RAGHAVENDRA G GAYATRI., ADVOCATE)

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO I) ISSUE A WRIT OF “MANDAMUS” COMMAND/COMPEL THE TRIBUNAL TO EXERCISE THE JURISDICTION WHICH IS POSSESS BUT DECLINING TO EXERCISE, FOR DISPOSING MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION MA No. 01/2023 WHICH IS BEFORE IT AS ANNEXURE ‘B’ AND II) PASS SUCH ORDERS AND

¶15

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:14897-DB WP No. 25162 of 2024

¶16

ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE ORDER TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶18

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT AND HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR

¶19

ORAL ORDER

¶20

(PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT)

¶21

Petitioner-party-in-person, who has suffered penalty

¶22

order, was before the Tribunal by moving Miscellaneous Application in M.A.No.01/2023. The said Application was dismissed by the Tribunal. Petitioner’s successive Miscellaneous Applications were also dismissed. Petitioner failed to pay the costs.

¶23

Petitioner-party-in-person, argues that it is the

¶24

right of a citizen to move any number of Miscellaneous Applications and that the Tribunal should pass order on their merits. It is too broad a proposition to agree with. A discretion or jurisdiction cannot be abused by making

¶25

¶26

NC: 2025:KHC:14897-DB WP No. 25162 of 2024

¶27

successive applications of the kind. Records reveal such a

¶28

culpable conduct on the part of petitioner.

¶29

In view of the above, petition is dismissed, costs

¶30

having reluctantly been made easy.

¶31