Disposed

Sri Lakshmi Venkateshwara Orphan v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC22 Dec 2021WP/22643/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A Writ Petition challenging non-consideration of a representation seeking relaxation from norms regarding the segregation of boys and girls. The Court disposed of the writ petition directing the respondent to consider the representation within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent No.2 to consider petitioner's representation and inform result within eight weeks; heavy costs if not complied with.

Sri Lakshmi Venkateshwara Orphan Vs State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.22643 OF 2021 (GM-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI LAKSHMI VENKATESHWARA ORPHAN EDUCATION CHARITABLE TRUST (R), C/O K R VENKATARAMAIAH BUILDING, OLD POST OFFICE ROAD, GUNIGUNTE PALYA, MULBAGAL TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT – 563131, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, SMT V K SARASWATHY, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, W/O NAGARAJU.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI.S VISWESWARAIAH, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPTD BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF WOMAN AND CHILD WELFARE, DIRECTORATE OF PLANNING, KARNATAKA COMPREHENSIVE CHILD AND WOMAN CARE SOCIETY, M S BUILDING, BENGALURU – 560001.

¶13

THE DISTRICT CHILD PROTECTION OFFICER, DEPARTMENT OF WOMAN AND CHILD WELFARE, 1ST FLOOR, DISTRICT COURT COMPLEX, KOLAR DISTRICT, KOLAR- 563101.

¶14

THE CHAIRPERSON GOVERNMENT BOYS AND GIRLS HOME, C W C MUSKAM, K G F, KOLAR DISTRICT – 563113.

¶15

¶16

THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF WOMAN AND CHILD WELFARE, 1ST FLOOR, DISTRICT COURT COMPLEX, KOLAR DISTRICT, KOLAR – 563101.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI. SRIDHAR HEGDE, HCGP)

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE R-2 DTD.01.02.2019 THE INTIMATION NOTICE DTD.26.11.2021 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-L AND M RESPECTIVELY BY DIRECTING THE R-2 TO RENEW THE REGISTRATION OF THE PETITIONER INSTITUTION BY ALLOWING THE W.P.

¶20

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

¶21

ORDER

¶22

The short grievance of the petitioner trust is against the

¶23

non-consideration of its representation dated 3.12.2021 at Annexure-O wherein some relief from the rigor of the norms is sought for, pleading certain special circumstances; learned counsel for the petitioner having argued the matter at length, now submits that if this prayer is granted, his client would be satisfied;

¶24

Learned HCGP on request having accepted notice for the respondents, initially opposed the Writ Petition contending that the segregation of boys & girls for the purpose of certain essential facilities is a matter of policy and

¶25

¶26

therefore, the petitioner cannot seek relaxation from the operation of such policies; having so contended, now he graciously agrees to instruct his clients to consider petitioners’ representation, in accordance with law and in a time bound way; this is a happy thing to happen.

¶27

In the above circumstances, this Writ Petition is

¶28

disposed off directing the respondent No.2 to consider petitioners’ subject representation in accordance with law and inform the result of such consideration to him within an outer limit of eight weeks failing which the erring official may be levied with heavy costs in the next level the litigation. All contentions are kept open

¶29

It hardly needs to be stated that such consideration would take place independent of Annexures–L & M respectively dated 1.2.2019 & 26.11.2021.

¶30

Now, no costs.

¶31

Sd/JUDGE

¶32

cbc

Sri Lakshmi Venkateshwara Orphan v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Lakshmi Venkateshwara Orphan v. 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

Janavi Shantharam Vs Recovery Officer

D.Y.Uppar Vs the State Information Commissioner

Sharan D Bandi Vs the State Information Commissioner

Mr Srinivas Vs State of Karnataka

The National Co-Operative Bank Ltd. Vs M/S Vishwas Concrete Pvt. Ltd.

Sri. Ramesh G Vs the Deebt Recovery Tribunal I