Disposed

Smt K Neelamma v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC4 Jun 2013WP/13225/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court disposed of a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner sought a mandamus directing respondents to consider representations regarding encroachment on public roads and to evict the encroachers. The court directed respondents to consider the representations expeditiously within three months.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of; respondents directed to consider petitioner's representations regarding encroachment expeditiously within three months.

Smt K Neelamma Vs State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2013)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

¶3

DATED THIS THE 04^th DAY OF JUNE, 2013

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.N. NAGAMOHAN DAS

¶6

WP No.13225 OF 2013[LB-RES]

¶7

BETWEEN

¶8

SMT K NEELAMMA W/O R RANGASWAMY AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS R/AT HOUSE NO.5 HOSABADAVANE, MADDUR VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI YALANDUR TALUK CHAMARAJANAGARA DISTRICT

¶9

... PETITIONER

¶10

(By Sri. M V CHARATI & H M MANJESH, ADV.)

¶11

AND

¶12

1.STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT DR B R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI VIKASASOUDHA BANGALORE-560001

¶13

2.THE DEPUTY COMMISIONER DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES

¶14

¶15

DOUBLE ROAD CHAMARAJANAGARA CHAMARAJANAGARA DISTRICT-571313.

¶16

3.THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER ZILLA PANCHAYATH DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES DOUBLE ROAD CHAMARAJANAGARA CHAMARAJANAGARA DISTRICT-571313.

¶17

4.THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER TALUK PANCHAYATH YALANDUR TOWN AND TALUK CHAMARAJANAGARA DISTRICT-571441.

¶18

5.THE PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER MADDUR GRAMA PANCHAYATH MADDUR, KASABA HOBLI YALANDUR TALUK CHAMARAJANAGARA DISTRICT-571441.

¶19

... RESPONDENTS

¶20

(By Sri : N.B.VISHWANATH, HCGP FOR R1 & 2 Sri : ASHOK N.NAYAK, ADV. FOR R3 TO R5)

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO CONSIDER THE PETITIONER REPRESENTATION VIDE ANNX-E DATED 15.12.13, VIDE ANNX-F AND H DATED 28.11.12,5.2.13 AND 26.2.13 AND EVICT THE PERSONS WHO HAVE ILLEGALLY OCCUPIED THE PUBLIC ROAD.

¶22

¶23

This petition coming on for preliminary hearing ‘B’ group this day, the court made the following:

¶24

ORDER

¶25

In this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to consider her representations as

¶26

per Annexure-E, dated 25.12.2012, Annexure-F dated 05.02.2013, Annexure-G dated 26.02.2013 and Annexure-H dated 02.03.2013. In these representations petitioner has requested the respondents to remove the encroachment made on the public road. These representations are given to respondents 3, 4 and 5. No prejudice will be caused to respondents 3, 4 and 5 if they are directed to consider the

¶27

petitioner’s representations as per Annexures-E, F, G and H respectively in accordance with law and as expeditiously as possible and in any event not later than three months from the date of receipt of

¶28

copy of this order. Accordingly the writ petition is hereby disposed of.

¶29

Sd/JUDGE.

¶30

DKB

Smt K Neelamma v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt K Neelamma v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr Sadananda Bhandary Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Jagadeeshaiah K R Vs the Tumkur Urban Development Authority

S M Sathyanarayan Vs the Assistant Revenue Officer

Green View Welfare Association Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri K Amaresha Babu Vs the Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike

Sri G Venkatarao Vs the Commissioner