Disposed

Suresh S/O Shamarayappa Muragoda v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC5 Apr 2019WA/100130/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ appeal was declared infructuous as the no-confidence motion had already been passed subsequent to the dismissal of the underlying writ petition. The appeal was disposed of citing the existence of a pending petition impugning the resolution.

What did the court decide?

The writ appeal was disposed of as it was rendered infructuous. Contentions were left open in the pending writ petition.

Suresh S/O Shamarayappa Muragoda Vs the… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶3

DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE G.NARENDAR

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE BELLUNKE A.S.

¶8

WRIT APPEAL No.100130/2019 (LB-RES)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SURESH S/O SHAMARAYAPPA MURAGODA, AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: ADYAKSHA VILLAGE PANCHAYAT, R/O: MURAKAMBI, TQ: SOUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI. ... APPELLANT

¶11

... APPELLANT

¶12

(BY SRI S.S.YADRAMI, ADVOCATE)

¶13

A N D :

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, DEPT. OF PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT, REPT. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001.

¶15

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, BAILHONGAL SUB DIVISION, TQ: BAILHONGAL, DIST: BELAGAVI-591102

¶16

THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER, TALUKA PANCHAYAT SOUNDATTI, TQ: SOUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI-591126.

¶17

MURAKUMBI GRAMA PANCHAYAT, AT: MURAKAMBI, TQ: SOUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI-591126, REPT. BY ITS PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER,

¶18

¶19

TQ: SOUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI-591304.

¶20

SMT.LAXMI IRAPPA BADIGERA, AGE ABOUT: 35 YEARS,

¶21

MAHANTESH M. NARASANNAVAR, AGE ABOUT: 48 YEARS,

¶22

MANJUNATH S/O SUBHASH NARASANNAVAR, AGE ABOUT: 31 YEARS,

¶23

SMT.DEMAVVA W/O CHANDRAPPA POOJERI, AGE ABOUT: 35 YEARS,

¶24

SMT.HEMAVATI W/O IRAPPA METI, AGE ABOUT: 35 YEARS,

¶25

SMT.HEMAVATI W/O SHRISHAIL MATHAPATI AGE ABOUT: 65 YEARS,

¶26

SMT.SUNANDA W/O BALAPPAP MEGERI, AGE ABOUT: 30 YEARS,

¶27

SMT.CHANNAVVA W/O BHIMAPPA NAIKAR, AGE ABOUT: 35 YEARS,

¶28

SANJU S/O DURAGAPPA HOSMANI, AGE ABOUT: 32 YEARS,

¶29

SMT.YALLAVVA W/O MALLAPPA SHIVANNAVAR, AGE ABOUT: 35 YEARS,

¶30

RESPONDENTS 5 TO 14 ALL ARE OCC: MEMBER OF PANCHAYAT, MEMBER MURAKUMBI GRAMA PANCHAYAT, AT: MURAKAMBI, TQ: SOUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI-591126. ...RESPONDENTS

¶31

(BY SRI RAVI HOSAMANI, AGA FOR R1 AND R2, NOTICE TO R3 AND R4 DISPENSED WITH, SRI H.M.DHARIGOND, ADV. FOR R5 TO R14)

¶32

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S.4 OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING THIS HON'BLE COURT TO, ALLOW THE WRIT APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE IMUPGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W.P.NO.105707/2019 (LB-RES) DATED 13.03.2019, IN

¶33

¶34

THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶35

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, G.NARENDAR J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶36

JUDGMENT

¶37

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondents 1 and 2 and the learned counsel for the caveator/respondents.

¶38

The intra Court appeal is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge rejecting the writ petition calling in question the notice of meeting issued by the 2^nd respondent to put to vote the no confidence motion proposed by a majority of the members.

¶39

It is submitted that subsequent to the dismissal of the writ petition, the no confidence motion has been passed on 21.03.2019. In that view of the matter, the instant writ appeal is rendered infructuous.

¶40

It is also submitted that the appellant has preferred another writ petition impugning the resolution by which the no confidence motion came to be passed.

¶41

¶42

In that view of the matter, all contentions are left open to be agitated in the pending writ petition.

¶43

We have also perused the resolution. The resolution does not refer to the discussion of any allegations or voting on the basis of the allegations. Hence, the writ appeal is disposed of.

¶44

Sd/JUDGE

¶45

Sd/JUDGE

¶46

jm/-

Suresh S/O Shamarayappa Muragoda v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suresh S/O Shamarayappa Muragoda v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramachandra @ Ramachandra Poojari Vs Karibasappa J.H. S/O. Jogikatte Hanumanthappa

Sri.Basappa @ Basavaraj S/O Venkappa Pujari Vs Shri.Venkappa Hanamappa Mullur

Smt.Asha W/O Upendra Chandachal, Vs Upendra S/O Chandrakant Chadachal

Parvathi Khemu Padti, Vs the Slao

The Commissioner of Vs M/S Hotel Sitara

Shri.Mahadev Vs the Karnataka Lokayukta