L.UMESH Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is knocking at the doors of Writ Court for setting at naught the proceedings in Appeal No. 24/2022 pending on the file of Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, Bengaluru (Court Hall No.5) mainly on the ground that the said appeal has been instituted much beyond the period prescribed by this Court in its judgment dtd. 17/12/2021 entered in W.P.No.21566/2021 (GM-KSR) at Annexure-E.

(2.) Learned HCGP on request has accepted notice for respondent nos. 1 & 2, notice to respondent no.3 having dispensed with. He opposes the petition contending that the prescription of limitation period by the Court is ordinarily treated as not being mandatory and therefore the relief which the petitioner has sought for cannot be granted.

(3.) At this stage learned counsel for the petitioner submits that regardless of the prayer made in the petition, his client would be satisfied if a direction is issued to the Tribunal to hear & dispose of the appeal within an outer limit of 10 days of course after giving an opportunity of hearing to him as well. The proposal of petitioner is fair & reasonable and its repulsion would result in injustice which the Writ Court cannot afford to do.