Parties Can File Application In Kannada Language Before State Administrative Tribunal: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court has held that an application before State Administrative Tribunal can be filed in Kannada language, observing that the expression “proceedings” under Rule 3 Karnataka Administrative Tribunal (Procedure) Rules read along with Rule 9(iii) KAT Rules of Practice includes filing of an application in Kannada.

Consequently, the Division Bench of Justice Ashok S. Kinagi and Justice Subramanya Rangarao set aside a Tribunal order rejecting an application filed in Kannada.

Commenting on Rule 3 of 1986 Rules, the Bench said, “On perusal, it is clear that Rule 3 provides for language of the Tribunal and sub-Rule (1) thereof delineates that the language of the Tribunal shall be in English, provided that the parties to the proceedings before the Tribunal may file a document drawn up in Kannada, if they so desire. Further, the proviso provides that the Tribunal may, in its discretion, permit the use of Kannada in the proceedings, however the final order shall be in English.”

The High Court further expounded on the term “proceedings” mention in Rule 3, stating, “From the perusal of the definition of the word 'proceedings', it is clear that 'the action taken in a Court to settle a dispute' and 'all acts and events between the time of commencement and the entry of judgment' includes the filing of an application before the Tribunal. Thus, the pleadings in an application can be filed in Kannada language before the Tribunal as per Rule 3 of 1986 Rules.”

The Bench also took note of Rule 9(iii) of the 1990 Rules, which provides that the documents, affidavit and pleadings can be filed before the Tribunal in either English or Kannada.

“From a bare reading of clause (iii) of Rule 9, it clearly discloses that the pleadings shall be English or Kannada. As such, the petitioner has rightly filed the application in Kannada language in terms of clause (iii) of Rule 9 of Rules of 1990,” the Court said.

The petitioner had originally approached the Tribunal challenging an additional selection list published on the official website, but the Tribunal had returned his application as it was Kannada and not English. Finding that the Tribunal erred in rejecting the application, the High Court quashed the impugned order and directed the Tribunal to dispose of the petitioner's application.