R.P.No.85/2019
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022
PRESENT
THE HON9BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL
AND
THE HON9BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI
REVIEW PETITION NO.85/2019 IN
WRIT PETITION NO.9347/2017 (S-CAT)
BETWEEN:
1.
NATIONAL DAIRY RESEARCH INSTITUTE (ICAR)
KARNAL- 132001, HARYANA
REPRESENTED BY DIRECTOR
2.
SOUTHERN REGIONAL STATION OF
NDRI, ADUGODI
BANGALORE 3 560 030
REPRESENTED BY ITS HEAD
& PETITIONERS
(BY SRI.B.A.CHANDRA SHEKAR, ADV.)
AND:
R.SHIV KUMAR
S/O RANGAPPA
RESIDING AT NO.18/2-1
5TH CROSS, VENKATESWARA LAYOUT
SUDU GUNTANA PALYA
D.R.C.POST
BANGALORE 3 560 029
& RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.R.NAVEEN KUMAR, ADV.)
THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION
114 READ WITH ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF CPC, PRAYING TO (A)
R.P.No.85/2019
2
REVIEW AND RECALL THE ORDER DATED: 01.09.2017
PASSED BY THIS COURT IN WRIT PETITION NO.9347/2017
(S-CAT) AND PASS SUCH OTHER ORDER AS DEEMED FIT IN
THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE.
THIS REVIEW PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION
THIS DAY, K.S.MUDAGAL. J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:
Heard.
This petition is filed seeking review of the
order
of
this
Court
dated
01.09.2017
in
W.P.No.9347/2017 (S-CAT). There is 527 days delay in
filing the petition. Therefore, IA No.1/2019 is filed
seeking condonation of delay.
3.
Needless to state that as per Section 5 of
the Limitation Act, the petitioners have to satisfy the
Court that there was sufficient cause for them in not
filing the petition within the prescribed time. The
explanation of the petitioners for the inordinate delay of
527 days in filing the petition is found only in
paragraphs 5 and 6 of the affidavit.
3
4.
In paragraph 5, it is said that after
meticulous examination of the order and taking legal
consultation, it was found that the order in question has
ramification over more than 100 Institutes of the Indian
Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR). Except that
absolutely there is no other explanation.
5.
In paragraph 6 of the affidavit it is said that
the process of consultation took lot of time, therefore,
there is delay in filing the petition. As per the
petitioners themselves, the certified copy of the order
was received within 13 days from the date of passing of
the order.
6.
The petitioners are autonomous statutory
bodies and not laymen. Under the circumstances, it
goes hard to accept that they are unaware that they
have to explain delay giving particulars such as at how
many levels the file was scrutinized and for how many
days the file was pending in such departments.
Absolutely there is no such objective explanation or
information.
4
7.
Under the circumstances, this Court does
not find any merit in the application. Therefore, the
application is dismissed. Consequently, the petition is
also dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
akc
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.