KEREKATTE PRASANNA CHARITABLE TRUST Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition (PIL) reflects the most casual and lethargical approach of the petitioner. The petitioner filed the present writ petition in the year 2017 with principal prayer challenging a notification of the year 1983, precisely the notification dtd. 22/10/1983. So, firstly, the petitioner took a leisure time, nearly 2 decades, for challenging the notification. Then, petition was pending in this Court for removal of office objections. Now, even after nearly 5 years and after grant of 6 opportunities, the office objections are yet not complied with.

(2.) Learned counsel submits before this Court that some of the office objections are complied with and if time is granted, other office objections would be removed.

(3.) As stated above, the sequence of events prompts us to state that the petitioner has approached this Court most casually and lethargically. Such approach looses the efficacy of the proceedings and particularly, the petition is titled as Public Interest Litigation. As such, the petitioner was expected to take necessary steps within a reasonable time. At the cost of repetition, we state that, leave aside any element to show that the petitioner is approaching this Court in a reasonable time, but the petitioner is approaching this Court in most casual manner and till date, the petition is pending for removal of office objections which clearly indicates that the petitioner is not at all seriously interested in prosecuting the petition. On this ground alone, the PIL is dismissed.