IN THE KARNATAKA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL AT

BENGALURU
APPLICATION No: / 2015

BETWEEN:

1. SRI. R. NAGU NAIK,

S/o Late Rama Naik,
Aged about 36 years,
R/at Dinnalli Village & Post,
Ramapura Hobli,
Kollegala Taluk,
Chamarajanagara District. … APPLICANT

Address for service :

N. R. NAIK & ASSOCIATES,
Advocates,
No. 147/7, Sri Ram1a Road,
2nd Block, Thyagarajanagar,
BENGALURU-560 028.
Mob. : 98440 67808

AND:

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
Rep. by its Secretary,
Forest Department,
Vidhana Soudha,
BENGALURU. 560001

2. THE PRINIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR FOREST,

Forest Department,
Aranya Bhavana,3rd Floor
18th Cross, Malleshwaram,
BENGALURU. 560003

3. THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST

Hanur, Kollegala Taluk,
Charamarajanagara District. 571440 …RESPONDENTS
 APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 21(3) OF THE
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL ACT OF 1985 WITH SECTION 5
OF LIMITATION ACT1963

That for reasons sworn to in the accompanying affidavit, the

applicant prays that this Hon’ble court be pleased to condone the
delay of 8 years,1 month, 9 days if any for filing of the above
application, in the interest of justice and equity.

BANGALORE
DATE: 06.11.2015 ADVOCATE FOR APPLICANT

Page 2 of 10
 APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 19 OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE
TRIBUNALS ACT, 1985
DETAILS OF APPLICATION

1. PARTICULARS OF THE ORDER AGAINST WHICH APPLICATION IS

MADE:

i) No.A2/Sibbandi/Di.Goo.Nou.Marana(RamaNaik)SiR-/2004-05

ii) Dated : 28.09.2006

iii) Issued by Third Respondent.
iv) Subject in brief: The applicant submits that he have made an
application for appointment on Compassionate appointment as
his father Rama Naik, Daily Wages Worker as Master Roll
Watcher, Kollegala Forest, died on 19.04.2004 during his
service. The Applicant’s Mother made application immediately
to appoint Applicant on Compassionate appointment on
15.07.2004, but the said application has been rejected as per
Rule 5 of Karnataka Civil Services (Compassionate
Appointment) Rules 1966. The reason has been assigned
stating that the said Rama Naik was a Daily Wages Worker,
hence this application.

2 LIMITATION:

This Application is preferred by the applicants challenging the

endorsement issued by the 3rd respondent on dated 28.09.2006 (Annexure-
A3). The Applicant further declares that the application is within the
limitation prescribed in Section 21 of the Administrative Tribunals Act,
1985, hence separate application filed for delay condonation.
3(A) FACTS OF THE CASE

1. The Applicant submit that Applicant the second applicant has made
an application before the third Respondent’s authority by enclosing
all necessary documents required under the rules. The applicant has
passed S.S.L.C and based on his qualification, requesting the
Respondent authorities to appoint him on Compassionate
appointment as he belongs to Banjara (Lambani) Community comes
under the Scheduled caste category. When the applicant’s mother has
made application and the same has been correspondent by the
Respondent authorities. The consent application and affidavit has

Page 3 of 10
 been submitted to the Respondent authorities. The applicant father
Rama Naik having wife by name S. Goje Bai, son R. Nagu Naik, hence
afford appointment to the applicant, who is having qualification of
S.S.L.C and he wants to join for duties under the control of the
Respondents authorities. The S.S.L.C Marks Card of the applicant is
herewith produced and marked as ANNEXURE –A1.

IN THE KARNATAKA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL AT

BENGALURU

APPLICATION No: / 2015

BETWEEN:

1. P. Kumar,
S/o. Papaiah,
Aged about 30 years,
Deputy Range Forest Officer,
Chikka Agrahara Ranage,
Chikkamangalur.

2. L. Parmesh,
S/o. Laxma Naik,
Aged about 30 years,
Deputy Range Forest Officer,

Page 4 of 10
 Koppa Ranage,
Koppa Town.

3. K.C. Girish,
S/o. Chandrashekar R.C.
Aged about 29 years,
Deputy Range Forest Officer,
Timber Dipot, Lakuvalli Ranage,
Koppa.

4. K. Anand,
S/o. Krishna Naik,
Aged about 27 years,
Deputy Range Forest Officer,
Singatagere Branch,
Kadoor Range,
Chikkamangalur.

5. H. S. Shashikumar,
S/o. Shamasundar,
Aged about 27 years,
Deputy Range Forest Officer,
Nature Camp, Mutthodi Range,
Chikkamangalur.

6. H. N. Naveen,
S/o. Neelakantappa,
Aged about 26 years,
Deputy Range Forest Officer,
Kanathi Branch,
Aldur Ranage,
Chikkamangalur.

7. Basavaraj S. Kannur,
S/o. Sharanappa,
Aged about 26 years,
Deputy Range Forest Officer,
Defence Work, Shringeri Range,
Chikkamangalur.

8. Faruqu Doddawada,
S/o. Muktheensab,
Aged about 31 years,
Deputy Range Forest Officer,
Begaru Branch, Shringeri Ranage,
Chikkamangalur. …. APPLICANTS

Page 5 of 10
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
Rep. by its Secretary,
Forest Department,
Vidhana Soudha,
BENGALURU. 560001

2. THE CHIEF CONSERVATIVE FOREST,

Forest Department,
Aranya Bhavana, 18th Cross,
Malleshwaram,
BENGALURU. 560003

3. THE CONSERVATIVE FOREST OFFICER

AND DIRECTOR,
Tiger Protective Authority,
Chikkamagalur. 577101

4. THE DEPUTY FOREST

CONSERVATIVE OFFICER
Chikkamagalur Division,
Chikkamagalur Dist.577101

5. THE DEPUTY FOREST

CONSERVATIVE OFFICER
Koppa Division,
Chikkamagalur Dist. 577101 …. RESPONDENTS

APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 4(4)(a) OF THE

KARNATAKA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUANL (P)
RULES 1986
The application respectfully submit as follows:-
1. The applicants preferred this application before
this Hon’ble Tribunal seeking direction and
That for the reasons sworn to in the
accompanying affidavit the Applicants prays that this
Hon’ble court be pleased to permit them to file a single
application as the common relief sought against the
respondents, in the interest of justice and equity.

Page 6 of 10
BANGALORE

DATE: ADVOCATE FOR APPLICANTS

IN THE KARNATAKA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL AT

BENGALURU

APPLICATION No: / 2015

BETWEEN:

1. P. Kumar,
S/o. Papaiah,
Aged about 30 years,
Deputy Range Forest Officer,
Chikka Agrahara Ranage,
Chikkamangalur.

2. L. Parmesh,
S/o. Laxma Naik,
Aged about 30 years,
Deputy Range Forest Officer,
Koppa Ranage,
Koppa Town.

Page 7 of 10
3. K.C. Girish,
S/o. Chandrashekar R.C.
Aged about 29 years,
Deputy Range Forest Officer,
Timber Dipot, Lakuvalli Ranage,
Koppa.

4. K. Anand,
S/o. Krishna Naik,
Aged about 27 years,
Deputy Range Forest Officer,
Singatagere Branch,
Kadoor Range,
Chikkamangalur.

5. H. S. Shashikumar,
S/o. Shamasundar,
Aged about 27 years,
Deputy Range Forest Officer,
Nature Camp, Mutthodi Range,
Chikkamangalur.

6. H. N. Naveen,
S/o. Neelakantappa,
Aged about 26 years,
Deputy Range Forest Officer,
Kanathi Branch,
Aldur Ranage,
Chikkamangalur.

7. Basavaraj S. Kannur,
S/o. Sharanappa,
Aged about 26 years,
Deputy Range Forest Officer,
Defence Work, Shringeri Range,
Chikkamangalur.

8. Faruqu Doddawada,
S/o. Muktheensab,
Aged about 31 years,
Deputy Range Forest Officer,
Begaru Branch, Shringeri Ranage,
Chikkamangalur. …. APPLICANTS

Address for service :

Page 8 of 10
 N. R. NAIK & ASSOCIATES,
Advocates,
No. 147/7, Sri Rama Road,
2nd Block, Thyagarajanagar,
BENGALURU-560 028.
Mob. : 98440 67808

AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
Rep. by its Secretary,
Forest Department,
Vidhana Soudha,
BENGALURU. 560001

2. THE CHIEF CONSERVATOR FOREST,

Forest Department,
Aranya Bhavana, 18th Cross,
Malleshwaram,
BENGALURU. 560003

3. THE CONSERVATOR FOREST OFFICER

AND DIRECTOR,
Tiger Protective Authority,
Chikkamagalur.

4. THE DEPUTY FOREST

CONSERVATOR OFFICER
Chikkamagalur Division,
Chikkamagalur Dist.

5. THE DEPUTY FOREST

CONSERVATOR OFFICER
Koppa Division,
Chikkamagalur Dist. …. RESPONDENTS

APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 19 OF THE

ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALS ACT, 1985

DETAILS OF APPLICATION
I. PARTICULARS OF THE ORDER AGAINST WHICH
APPLICATION IS MADE :

v) No. 10/2014-15

Page 9 of 10
 vi) Dated : 05.09.2014
vii) Issued by second Respondent.
viii) Subject in brief: The applicants submit that they
have appointed as a Forest guard in the year 2009
and confirmed their services on regular basis from
12.05.2011. In continuation of having post of forest
guard, they have been promoted as a Deputy Range
forest as per Rule 32 of Karnataka Civil Service
Rules. The order has been issued by the third
Respondent and they have been posted of their
respective posts, now it is surprise that their
promotion has been withdrawn due to administrative
problem. Even though these applicants were
continuously working in a vacant post. The second
Respondent passed the order and directing to other
Respondents to effect the withdrawal of promotional
order immediately.

2. LIMITATION:

This Application is preferred by the applicants challenging the

order passed by the 2nd respondent on dated 05.09.2014
(Annexure-A___). The Applicants further declare that their
application is within the limitation prescribed in Section 21 of
the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985,

3 (A) FACTS OF THE CASE

1. The applicants submit that for the post of Deputy Range

Forest Office were promoted by way of promotion and these
posts shall be fill up at the rate of 7:1 ratio accordingly

Page 10 of 10
 these applicants were promoted under Rule 32 of
Karnataka Civil Service Rules. The applicants No. 1, 3, 4, 7
and 8 were passed the departmental examination along
with others and after passing their departmental
examination has been confirmed about the service of the
applicants. The official memorandum issued in respect of
applicants No. 1, 3, 4, 7 & 8 dated : 26.09.2011 and
26.08.2012 are herewith produced and marked as
ANNEXURE – A1 TO A5 respectively.

2. The applicants submit that after regularization and

permanent posts there are several vacancies to the filled
up and as per the provision of rule 32 of K.C.S. Rules, the
applicants are entitled for the post of Deputy Range Forest
officer as per Rule 32 and promotions were given to them
in the year 2011. These applicants are promoted in a clear
vacancy posts on deputation and continuously worked
since from 2011 and till today these applicants are having
post of their respective range.

3. It is submitted that the Chief Forest Conservator Officer,

Chikkamagalur Range, Chikkamagalur issued the order in
No. 10/2014-15 dated : 05.09.2014 stating that though
the applicants are eligible for the higher post who are
promoted, but they have not been confirmed their higher
post as a result they are not entitled for right to continue
on promotional posts. It is further submitted that under
the administrative grounds and other reasons, these
applicants are going to be appointed but their promotion
has been given under Rule 32 entitled for salary and other
emaluates, but not the promotional posts. Hence, the order

Page 11 of 10
 has been passed immediately effected against the
applicants and relieve them from the promotional posts.
The order passed by the third Respondent is herewith
produced and marked as ANNEXURE – A6.

4) In the circumstances, the order passed by the 2 nd

respondent dated 05.09.2014, the applicants are

approaching this Hon'ble Tribunal under Section 19 of the

Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, having left with no

other alternative remedy and urges the following grounds

in support of his prayer for reliefs.

5. The applicants who are filed their common application as

the relief sought in the application effected to all the

applicants one and the same. Hence the single application

has been filed.

3. (B) GROUNDS FOR RELIEF

1. The first and second Respondents providing the

promotional benefits under Rule 32 of K.C.S Rules and
entitled by the applicants in accordance with law and the
same cannot be deprived by the Respondents authorities.

2. The promotional order has been effected under Rule 32 of

K.C.S. Rules and continuously enjoying the said post. At
the same time these promotional posts are to be filled up
by way of direct recruitment and whatever the promotion

Page 12 of 10
 given in favour of the applicants as per the ratio 7:1
framed by the authorities as per the rules.

3. The third Respondent issued the order withdrawing the

promotional posts but it is ordered they are entitled the
pay and salary and other benefit in accordance with
promotional benefits, but not the posts.

4. The third Respondent without providing any opportunity to

the applicants before issuing the order but inspite of that
they are in deprive principal of natural justice.

5. The applicants who are working in a clear vacant posts

and till today no promotion were given to other categories
even the authorities are not made any recruitment for the
particular posts. Such being the case their promotion is
not bad in law but still they have been taken by
withdrawing the promotional posts without assigning any
proper reason.

6. There is no any irregularity or illegality in the promotional

order and none of the authorities or persons were
questioned about the promotion given to the applicants.

7. The applicants No. 1 to 4 are belongs to Scheduled caste

category persons and No. 5 to 8 were general category who
are having promotional posts, but this promotion has been
effected based on their qualification and service rendered
by them as per Rules 32 of K.C.S. Rules.

Page 13 of 10
8. The order passed by the third Respondent is not speaking
order and it is not sustainable in law, hence liable to be
set-aside.

9. The applicant will raise additional ground at the time of

hearing of the application.

3. (C) GROUNDS FOR INTERIM RELIEF

The applicants submit that they have been promoted for

higher posts under Rules 32 of K.C.S. Rules and they are
enjoying all the benefits, the promotional posts has been
withdrawal but not the benefits payable to them. Hence it
is just and necessary to stay the order passed by the third
Respondent issued in No. 10/2014-15, dated : 05.09.2014
produced at ANNEXURE – A6 and grant such other
interim order deems fit by this Hon'ble Tribunal, in the
interest of justice and equity.

4. What alternative remedy is available? Whether such

remedy is available? Result thereof.

The Applicants having no other alternative remedy

available to her is presenting this application under section
19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.

5. Matter not previously filed or pending with any other

Courts.

No other proceeding has been initiated by the applicant

previously in respect of the same subject matter and
hence, no petition or the like is pending consideration
before any Tribunal or Court of law in respect of the same
subject matter.

Page 14 of 10
6. RELIEF (S) SOUGHT

WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that the Hon'ble

Tribunal be pleased to:

i) Issue a writ of Certiorari to quash the Order passed by the

third Respondent in No. 10/2014-15, dated : 05.09.2014
produced at (ANNEXURE-A6), in the interest of justice and
equity.

ii) Pass such other order or direction deemed just and

expedient in the circumstances of the case including the
costs.

7. INTERIM ORDER, IF ANY, PRAYED FOR

Pending disposal of application, the applicants filed by

them may be consider on priority basis by allowing the
application till than grant interim stay of order passed by
the third Respondent in No. 10/2014-15, dated :
05.09.2014 produced at (ANNEXURE-A6).

Bangalore
Date: ADVOCATE FOR THE APPLICANTS

VERIFICATION

I, K. Anand, S/o. Krishna Naik, Aged about 27 years,

Deputy Range Forest Officer, Singatagere Branch, Kadoor
Range, Chikkamangalur, now at Bengaluru, the fourth applicant
and on behalf of other applicants do hereby verify that the
statements made in paragraphs 1 to 3A, 4 & 5 are true to best of

Page 15 of 10
our knowledge, belief and information, believe them to be true
and the statements made in paragraphs 3B, 3C, 6 & 7 are
believed to be true based on legal advise.

Further, we have not suppressed any material facts.

Bengaluru
Date: Signature of the 4th Applicant

To:

The Registrar,
KAT, Kandaya Bhavan,
K.G. Road, Bangalore.

Page 16 of 10
 BEFORE THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,
AT BANGALORE
I.A.
IN
O.A. No. 789/2015
BETWEEN:

Sri. Krishnappa V.,

S/o. Venkatappa,
Aged about 56 years,
Working as Khalasi,
Under Deputy Chief Engineer
Construction North
Bangalore Cantonment,
Bangalore. …. Applicant

AND:
1. Union of India,
Rep. by its Divisional Railway Manager,
Bangalore Division,
South Western Railway,
Bangalore.

2. The Divisional Personal Officer,

Bangalore Division,
South Western Railway,
Bangalore

3. The Divisional Engineer,

Construction Bangalore Cantonment,
South Western Railway,
Bangalore Cantonment,
Bangalore.

4. The Deputy Chief Engineer

Construction North B.N.C.
South Western Railway,
Bangalore Cantonment,
Bangalore. …. Respondents

Page 17 of 10
 APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 21 OF CENTRAL
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALS ACT, 1985

The applicant above named most respectfully submits

as follows:

1. The applicant was appointed as a Khalasi in the

year 1982 and continuously worked under the

control of the Respondents authorities. The

applicant is entitled promotional benefit as per the

rules and regulations.

2. The applicant has served more than 33 years of

service and he has made representation to the

authority as he is entitled promotional benefits for

the post of Grade – III, Grade – II, Grade – I and

M.C.M., but till today the promotional benefits are

not given to him. The Petitioner has made

representation to the Respondent authority on

10.12.2012 and the at later stage the legal notices

are issued to the authorities and even personally

handed over to other Respondents calling them to

consider to provide promotional benefits.

Page 18 of 10
3. The applicant submits that he used to transfer one

place to another and he has been deputed to

Engineering Department and while deputing him,

he has reached semi skilled but later stage the same

designation as Khalasi has been shown in the pay

slips maintained by the Respondents authorities.

4. The applicant submits that he has waited till filing

of the application as his representation as well as

legal notice going to be considered and providing

promotional benefits to him. The applicant

continuously visited and several meetings were held

for the welfare of the employees and during the said

course of meetings, orally he has requested to

provide the promotional benefits, but no such

benefits were given to him.

5. The applicant submits that since he is working in

Engineering open line and he has deputed from one

place to another at the new proposal projects at

Chennai, Salam as well as Chikkajajoor, now there

is a new project from Tumkur to Davanagere. By

Page 19 of 10
 virtue of all these transfers, the applicant could not

able to approach before this Hon'ble Tribunal well in

time, however the promotional benefits is not

provided by the Respondents authorities. There is a

delay in approaching before this Hon'ble Tribunal

due to various works entrusted to him. Hence, there

is a delay in filing this application for seeking

direction to the authorities.

6. The applicant submits that for approaching the

delay to this Hon'ble Court is not intentional one,

but bonafide reason due to deputation in various

places for implementation of new project proposed

made by the authorities. If the delay is not

condoned the applicant will be put to irreparable

loss and injustice would be caused. Hence, it is just

and necessary to condone the delay in filing of the

above application. If this application is not allowed,

the applicant will be put to irreparable loss where

he has been denied his rightful claim by the

authorities. On the other hand no harm will be

caused to the Respondents authorities.

Page 20 of 10
 WHEREFORE, the applicant prays this Hon'ble

Tribunal be pleased to condone the delay in filing of the

above application, in the interest of justice and equity.

Bangalore,
Dated : Advocate for Applicant

Page 21 of 10
 BEFORE THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,
AT BANGALORE
O.A. No. 789/2015
BETWEEN:

Sri. Krishnappa V. …. Applicant

AND:
Union of India,
Rep. by its Divisional Railway Manager
and others .. Respondents
VERIFYING AFFIDAVIT
I, Krishnappa V., S/o. Venkatappa, Aged about 56
years, Working as Khalasi, Under Deputy Chief Engineer
Construction North Bangalore Cantonment, Bangalore, do
hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as follows: -

1. I submit that, I am the Applicant in the above case and

I am well conversant with the facts of the case.

2. I submit that, the averments made at paras 1 to 6 of the

Appeal are true to the best of my knowledge, belief and
information.
What is stated above is true to the best of my
knowledge, belief and information.

Identified by me: Deponent

Sworn to before me

Advocate.

Place: Bangalore
Date:

No. of Corrections.

Page 22 of 10