MANJUNATHA Vs. COMMISSIONER FOR TRANSPORT M S BUILDING

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition is directed against the order dtd. 30/7/2015 passed by the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal' for the sake of brevity), whereby the Tribunal for the reasons recorded in the order has dismissed the application.

(2.) We have heard Mr.Sreedhara H.R., learned Counsel appearing for Mr.B.Pramod, learned Counsel for the petitioner.

(3.) The contention raised on behalf of the petitioner is that the petitioner was major at the time of death of his father. However, the mother of the petitioner applied for compassionate appointment on behalf of the petitioner. He submitted that it was the duty of the Department to convey to the petitioner or the mother of the petitioner that the son should apply. However, as no communication was made by the Department or the Officers of the Department, the application could not be made within time limit of one year. Learned Counsel submitted that if for unavoidable reason the application could not be made within a period of one year, this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution may condone the delay and grant the benefit.