High Court Karnataka High Court

V Muniyappa vs The Divisional Controller K S R T C on 10 August, 2010

Karnataka High Court
V Muniyappa vs The Divisional Controller K S R T C on 10 August, 2010
Author: Ram Mohan Reddy
},'V;;Ii_E¥O?£I,}I5;"_Li3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT 

DATED THIS THE 10%" DAY OF' AI_IG7{_.I_S'I'I;2:Q1.() O '  I 

BEFORE

THE 1-£ON'BLE MR.JU:~m..§;E  MO:::§5II§>i*
WRIT PETITION. N0.1V0-0;L.;'3~_(?F_ 2010 .gL~1§sRm)

BEFWEEN:

V.MUN1YAPpA«.._'      :

S/O LATE:4.X/*.I;:1\:;:;AfmswAMY   ' 

AGE:55   J    

RESiDING~..A'i7. _/iRABIKO'I'}r?iNUI{ VILLAOI;

AND: ~1;5(js"r.., IKOIAR' TALU K  "

KOLAR DISf1'Ri§3'.fL"I  - . ...PE'I'1'1"IONE:R
(B-Y;s;R1 'f. IS FILED UNI'f)I%3R AR'I'{CLI:3S 226 AND 227

 AS 'OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING T O SI3'I3ASII)EI
 * fl_'IffIS.-E?) AVVARD E)A'I'I*"3I) 29.3.2006 PASSED BY TIIIZ IJ\I.3OUR
 COURT IN I.D.I\IO.83/ZOOI ON ITS FILE. AS CON"i'AII\II£I.)
? UNDEIR ANNIEXURHA AND CONSI€QUEN'I'1.Y AI.I.OW "I'i'"~I'E

I DISPUTE AS PRAYEI) FOR BY ALLOWING THIS WRIT

PE'I'l'I'ION.



};¥;J,iiU_(3_E $151!}

THIS W13. IS COMING ON FOR PRi§'yLii\;f'I'if»iA.E'ZY'
HEARING mis DAY, 'rue COURT lViA£E)i:".-  

FOIJLOWING:

Petitioner. while iii  'V the
respondent. Public:   as a

COi’1duetOr,.wae Of less
revenue dU;i’IT’i§g_:,:.’V13fi1:(?’ 19/8/1997 :0
i2/10/ terminated from
That Order when
called 01 by invoking See. 10{4~

A) aging I1idL1efri’éai di3is’pu:,es Act. 1947, the P1’e,=siding

‘ V’ Court, by Award dt. I3’/2/2004,

eheid iI,h.t’3:”*._ddff1.*f§Sti(T enquiry as fair 81 proper and

1;hei*eaFt_e’1’Orde1″ dt. 29/3/2006. Am1ex.A. 1″ejec*ied

V]t’,heviypetii.i*On. E-Ience this peitition filed On 24/3/ZOIO.

2. The delay of four years in p1’efer1’ing the writ:

“;*pei.iI:iOn is explained in ;)e1ra.gra.ph~3 staiimg tl’1e’1t”

petitioner having suffered a heart’ ailment prex-»’en1ed him

A

flYi’.§tl(n/_’-“Ia;

“n
Al’lA

from iakiiig steps in the matter for a period of {l»7_.x_géa3.z”s.

The ClOCl,lFH(,’1’1l’S in support of the claim of h_¢-;*.j’2i1*’t.’ –«é:_il_rj’_1’cir}_lf’« _

is said to be an “Eco Cardiogram” wliiiéhi’~..dt)<3ss=Antgl

ariimasle an opinion that he sufl7r:I's:_-frgin '–heai"I' ai!:i":<1__t?I*;:t_.'

The out patieiii. departn1e1*i.l.'slip 'V4/V'lH<V:')f7l3

Jayadeva Eristitute of Cardi()IQ'§vV'_, is 21 }5res(:ripl.i():'2 and
does not 0pin€ that t.h.6*.7 peLiLt.i~i)_i1el"—-é§'11Al'fe1's from a lmaxrt

ailment.

ma1l’.el”l21l to establish tlia! for ex
(tont:iI1Lio§1S* pe1’i.g).Cl:f0fl£l.__S?’e.:'{}’s ie., from 24/6/2006, the

dat€,<:-.f 0lZ)lllZl.~1l.I,l1iI'1g'l' t:I"l'e? 'CE,-rt.iiied copy of the impug1i1c(l

,.i.,9wé1rd.*7"'~th'e+._ petitiormr was continuously ill. 'l'he

Wrgxp-lafia:fiQVii r.jl7fe1'ecf. can hardly be said to be saf,isl'dcl.ory.

'£2' now a well settled principle of law {'11:-at

._whil_4e 116 period of limit:ati0n fixed, but in the normal]

(:=0L1'1"se of cw-.%1*1l.s. the party required to file 2.: civil

mp"r()(teedi11g ought: fr.) be the g:,.:idi1'1g factor. V/Vhilc? is. is

t:1'ue that. t,h_is CXl.I'E1OI'dil}E1I'yjl.i1'iS(llCti()I1 is available lo

M

3};-1i;Jii€ili»fLU

mitigate the suffering of the people in generefflf'l3::1§:«–._§l _

not out of place to mer1E;io1"1 t.h.:1t. t.hi£;""evxf1<a(5:tciinzujy

jurisdiction has been conferred on tl"'1e..-lawc0LVi1°€.:§ :lI.'ieA_.1_'_1(,"'i;'*fej1'

Art.226 of the Cor1stit.L1tioé_ *~:.)_f Inltiiaxon :aTV?£};1*;–.r.e'sdufidul"

equitable principle. llence "delay
defeats equity". has in the mat,t,er
of grant of relief–1rnde:2"'A1.i.l:2?l.ES,§}f_ The.
Ciiscretiongrel..:j'e1le:'f–;'_§:arl:_Ere one has. 1101" by
act or.ConAdL1:e't:'1–Igiyerr' his rights. {iquify
i'21vourvé3A than an iradolem one

and this l'b.eilr;g tE1e'Abé1sz1'_lC facet. of law. the qL1est:io1"1 of

cor;d?;)ni_r1gVt:he "(:l'e.1.ay_of 4 years in filing the writ, p<-eteimm

The legal maxim. "VIGlLEN'I'i BUS ET

N'0i\:*~'L)C'Ri¥zI-fiéivrl BUS JURA SUBR{:1NlVN'I' {Law

those wllm are vigilant and not those who are ind()1e1'1f,.}",

'~?f"ar)jl§lies on all its foLt1's to the {attire of this Case.

M

E':L}3,j,£2i_{L5_-'1_U

5. Applying the aforesaid trite law. petiilfiim: _

from inordirlaite delay and 18.T,(“,h€S di_seai:1;i.t:}’i’:1g;;’-A1’h_é>

petitiomar to any mlief.

Petition is accordingiy i*’*cjé<éted. '

Rdfiw