Writ Petition No. 6972 of 2024 · The High Court
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:2407 WP No. 6972 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT WRIT PETITION NO. 6972 OF 2024 (S-RES) BETWEEN: SRI. ROSARIO MENDONCA ALIYAS ROSARIO LOBO S/O LATE MERCINA MENDONZA, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, HOLY SPIRIT, D.NO.9-33/6(4)3, IDYA, SURATKAL, MANGALORE-575 014. (BY SRI. M RAJASHEKAR, ADV.) AND: 1. GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, TO THE MINISTRY OF PORTS, SHIPPING AND WATER WAYS PARIVAHAN BHAVAN, #1, PARILIAMENT STREET, NEW DELHI-110001. …PETITIONER 2. NEW MANGALORE PORT AUTHORITY PANAMBUR, MANGALORE DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT-575 010 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN. 3. DEPUTY CONSERVATOR (STAT) MARINE DEPARTMENT NEW MANGALORE PORT TRUST PANAMBUR-575010.
Legal Reasoning
(BY SRI.S KASHINAGALINGAM, CGC FOR R1) …RESPONDENTS Digitally signed by MARIGANGAIAH PREMAKUMARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:2407 WP No. 6972 of 2024 THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A) DIRECTION SETTING ASIDE / QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE R3 BEARING NO. 40/1/2010/MDE2 DATED 16/12/2011 VIDE ANNEXURE-F AND B) ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS TO THE RESPONDENTS TO PAY / RELEASE ALL THE WAGES, INCREMENTS, PROMOTIONS / FINANCIAL UPGRADATIONS INCLUDING ALL MONETARY BENEFITS OF WAGE REVISION THAT HAS TAKEN PLACE FROM 16/12/2011 TO 02/03/2014, THE DATED ON WHICH THE PETITIONER WOULD HAVE RETIRED ON COMPLETION OF 58 YEARS ALONG WITH INTEREST UNTIL PAYMENT. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT ORAL ORDER Petitioner, ex-employee of second respondent is before this Court praying to quash Annexure-F bearing No.40/1/2010/MDE2 dated 16.12.2011 and for a writ of mandamus to the respondents to pay/release all the wages, increments, promotions/financial upgradations including all monetary benefits of wage revision that has taken place from 16.12.2011 to 02.03.2014, the date on - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:2407 WP No. 6972 of 2024 which, petitioner would have retired on completion of 58 years along with interest until payment. 2. Heard the learned counsel Sri.M.Rajashekar for petitioner and learned Central Government Counsel Sri.S.Kasinagalingam for respondent No.1. Perused the writ petition papers. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was relived of his duties on 31.12.2006 stating that petitioner had attained the age of superannuation, taking the date of birth of petitioner as 09.12.1948. Learned counsel would submit that the actual date of birth of the petitioner is 16.02.1956 and the petitioner ought to have been continued up to February- 2014. Learned counsel would submit that the criminal prosecution against the petitioner for the alleged submission of the forged Transfer Certificate in C.C.No.73/2003, petitioner is acquitted of the charges. Further, learned counsel would submit that the petitioner’s suspension was revoked and it is also held that the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:2407 WP No. 6972 of 2024 petitioner would be entitled for salary and allowances during the period of suspension. Further, learned counsel would submit that the petitioner’s pensionary benefits are not settled till this date and on the other hand, there is a direction to recover a sum of Rs.21,04,815/- from the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner had received pay and allowances beyond 2006, the date of superannuation. Thus, learned counsel would submit that the action of the respondents is arbitrary and opposed to service records. He further submits that the date of birth submitted by the petitioner at the time of his joining duty is accepted by respondents and hence they could not have proceeded without opportunity to the petitioner and relieved him from services of the second respondent. Thus, learned counsel would pray for allowing the writ petition. 4. Per contra, learned Central Government Counsel Sri.S.Kasinagalingam invites attention of this Court to the statement of objections filed on behalf of - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:2407 WP No. 6972 of 2024 second respondent and submits that the second respondent obtained the petitioner’s Transfer Certificate and his service records wherein it is found that the date of birth of the petitioner is 09.12.1948 and not 16.02.1956. Based on the said documents, enquiry was conducted against the petitioner and thereafter action was taken to relieve the petitioner from duty on 31.12.2006. Thus, he supports the impugned order. It is also contended that the writ petition is liable to be dismissed on the ground of delay and laches. He submits that no explanation whatsoever is stated in the writ petition for the delay of more than 13 years in approaching this Court. Thus, he prays for dismissal of
Decision
the writ petition. 5. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusal of the writ petition papers, I am of the view that the petitioner would not be entitled for any relief as prayed in the writ petition. Moreover, writ petition suffers from delay and laches. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:2407 WP No. 6972 of 2024 6. Impugned order at Annexure-F is dated 16.12.2011, whereas the petitioner has filed this writ petition before this Court on 23.02.2024. There is no explanation whatsoever for the delay in approaching the Court. A person who sleeps over his right would not be entitled for discretionary relief under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. There is more than 13 years delay in approaching this Court. Further, petitioner is relieved of his duties on 31.12.2006, taking his date of birth as 09.12.1948. The said situation cannot be reversed at this stage. 7. A perusal of the documents produced along with statement of objections reveals that the date of birth of the petitioner in terms of Transfer Certificate issued by the Mysore Education Department is 09.12.1948. The Transfer Certificate issued by the Principal, Government Pre- University College also indicates the date of birth of the petitioner as 09.12.1948. The service book of the petitioner also indicates his date of birth as 09.12.1948. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:2407 WP No. 6972 of 2024 When series of documents indicate the date of birth of the petitioner as 09.12.1948, I do not find any error in the impugned order at Annexure-F dated 16.12.2011. There is no merit in the writ petition. 8. For the reasons stated above, writ petition stands rejected. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE NC CT:bms List No.: 1 Sl No.: 32