Shri Ravi Bellemane vs Director Of Treasuries on 9 December, 2010

 Sn' KAS'HINATI¥:;I  FOR
 JAGADISH,  CA.)

 TO RELEASE THE ORDER OF
  A13 PjOI1\IT1{IENT IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER TO THE
_  ASSISTANT TREASURY OFFICER AND POST
 AGAINST THE RESERVED VACANCY AND TO

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALOfRE' -.
Dated: This the 91%: day of Decembexjéo Iii    L
BEFORE  %     
THE HON'BLE IVIRJUSTICE V,J./§(3I&?§T1I\IATH;'XPE__ 
W.P.NO.33903;j;_3_O1OV"{S¥RES)f '    
BETWEEN:   "  I

SHRI RAVI BELLEMANE. .  ,   
ALSO KNOWN AS RAVI RAI/iA,1'43I2;LLEMANE,
S/O RAMA BELLEMAN_E}, 'AGED 
SHIRESTEDAR;'MAGISTRATE_ COURT,  '
BANGALORE;--56Q 009,. i   _ 
       »

   »  '  PETITIONER

[By Sri" SIP  'SI}NIOR" COUNSEL,
FOR SRI  V KRISHNA;)'

AND:

DIRECTOR OF TREASURIES, V

OI+j1«*IC,E OEIDI  «ECTORATETIF TREASURIES,

BADIGALOM-SS0 0401.,
    ',  ...RESRONDENT

 'Vf1f*I~IIS%"«--I2v.P. FILED PRAYING TO DIRECT THE

AWARD OTHER BENEFITS INCLUDING EXEMPLARY

 



6

scheduled caste, there was no question of the

petitioner being repeatedly asked to produce-[the

caste verification certificate and therefore  .

is sought to be given to the respondent"t'o" ----release"theV4 "'

appointment order.

7. On the otherV’h’a1_f1d, le.arned*counsel

Kashinath for the respondent contended that, the
question relating to castc:g’o_f .petitioner is being
examined a_i1d__ the1*efore; shall require

to produce.the:’caste”vefi-fi’cation certificate since he is
seeking’ the post of Asst. Treasury

pg MoreoV_e_r.v learned counsel argued that by

‘ gvirturevg”ofi’~Sectior1 15 of the Administrative Tribunal

has no jurisdiction to entertain the

matter; and placed reliance on the Apex Court

A d.Vdie”c_ision reported in AIR 1997 S.C.1125.

8. Having thus heard both sides, as the
whole issue relates to the caste of the petitioner and

when the petitioner had already been selected by the

E?

tpvetitionertd’Within:ttveek from the date of receipt of a

of this order.

Dvr:

9

10. Under these circumstances, to
ends of justice and to prevent further
petitioner losing even the _p.resepnt.’u’ ‘A
Treasury Officer, this court
matter is fit enough to in d’
its writ jur1’sdict1’on__not v\ri_t.hstan’ding.the-submission
made by the learned–..:counsv-ititfortflfreitrespondent that
the matters to be dealt by

the Administéraithte ‘Tri};iu.nal..”bj,f_’virtue of Section 15 of

the Admiritstradttiye

In the resu«1.t; is allowed and writ of
be V”‘ie,§..ued to the respondent to

rele’aS’e;dth–e,A appointment in favour of the

3d/-3
Iudcjé