Order on a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution filed by Sri ruidarahally Hobii against Bruhat Bangalore Mahila Samithi, regarding the Commissioner's order dated 21.2.2011 and related matters in files No. 18014/2011.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
it ritiIcl OUFT3FK RIP A PA Eli’ AL R
DATEDTHIT’1E 1” lAY OF lAY ‘01?
bEFUW
THE- I-’ON’PLE F-W i’JsrIcE ISHOK B. HP4Lr1IERI
Will Erff!OF4 Nc.548011C’12 (!B-BF’5P,
BETWEEN:
bangalure. (B, Sri ruidarahally I-Iobii, Aged about 42 years, . .Ilagaroja, Advocdte’ Sri M.Subramani, p a Ba g IoeFrtra jk . Petitioner I Vais va 1 t 1eda a y Vi a e
MilD.
rt or I 3a qiIc rc I’’ v ic pr.ient D1l e )artr. By its %eretar., “d’iana Soudhe
Is P• Bruhat Bangalcre Mahi’agara PaitLe 1 dd ‘(4 ilJIC i c’ic Bb 1e-’ Manaoevui ri [.:vIsI(,t) 1 r r tii t(1.ef in .1” eBr€ S cic, 444 •
i •F,’’ . er’
C end the 21 t_ t d rirrular dated 7 2 11 pasced ty the P2 “ide Anrx ccd ndt Commiscioner. BBMP. Maliadevpura DVN ,tdb Thic writ petitior, is filed undet Mt:eles 226 and 227 of the citD€u SEST. Bancialore vide mdi r yin o qt st ti Costtuton o r x if a o 3 12 2039 passcd t•v R... Mt .knnx E and ccnseqt.ently the
ihis v’rit petition reming on kr ee’irii:ary heiring this yte ortndetF tilovig.
QLQfl
c’sostd ‘f i et’t:on order, dated 20.4 2012 passed The i-sues raise i petitio i are covet e’ This netition is ais Court’s s Writ f ht said rda in n thi’ No 18014/2011 and r.onnectd petitions y th
(1/
a
• ‘I
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution is maintainable?
Bangalore (B). Sri ruidarahally Hobii
Bruhat Bangalore Mahila Samithi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
