Disposed

Sri Surendran Thampi v. Karnataka Industrial Areas

Karnataka HC4 Feb 2021WP/48327/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India as withdrawn. The petitioner sought to urge the Court to permit withdrawal after the concerned authorities assured them of considering the grievance and waiving the penalty under consideration.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh petition if any fresh cause of action arises.

Sri Surendran Thampi Vs Karnataka Industrial Areas — Corruption | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2021

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO. 48327 OF 2017 (GM-KIADB)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI SURENDRAN THAMPI S/O.VASUDEVAN PILLAI AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS NO.37, SREERAAGAM BASAVESWARA ROAD NEAR SES SCHOOL, T.DASARAHALLI BENGALURU – 560 057

¶9

... PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI RAJESHWARA P.N. , ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD NO.49, 4^TH AND 5^TH FLOORS EAST WING, KHANIJA BHAVAN RACE COURSE ROAD BENGALURU – 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER & EXECUTIVE MEMBER

¶13

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER & EXECUTIVE MEMBER, KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD NO.49, 4^TH AND 5^TH FLOORS, EAST WING, KHANIJA BHAVAN RACE COURSE ROAD BENGALURU – 560 001

¶14

¶15

THE SECRETARY - 2 KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD NO.49, 4^TH AND 5^TH FLFOORS, EAST WING KHANIJA BHAVAN RACE COURSE ROAD BENGALURU – 560 001

¶16

... RESPONDENTS

¶17

(BY SRI K.KRISHNA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3)

¶18

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 21.09.2017 VIDE ANNEXURE-B DEMAND FOR RS.75,61,772/IS CONCERNED. QUASH THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 23.09.2017 VIDE ANNEXURE-A PASSED BY THE R-3. AND ETC.,

¶20

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

ORDER

¶22

The learned counsel for petitioner files a memo for withdrawal dated 04.01.2021, which reads as under:

¶23

“The Petitioner in the above case humbly prays that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to permit them to withdraw the above Writ Petition, as the KIADB authorities assures for waiving of penalty and it is under consideration of KIADB. Copy of the Petitioner’s letter, dated 17.03.2020 in this regard is enclosed herewith.

¶24

¶25

Wherefore, the Petitioner crave for the kind indulgence of this Hon’ble Court to dispose the above petition as withdrawn with liberty to file fresh Writ Petition, if need be, in the interest of justice and equity.”

¶26

The sum and substance of the memo is that the respondent Nos.1 to 3 are willing to consider the grievance of the petitioner. In view of the assurance given by the authorities, petitioner seeks to withdraw the present writ petition.

¶27

The submissions of the learned counsel for petitioner and the memo are placed on record.

¶28

In view of the aforesaid submissions of the learned counsel for petitioner and perusal of the memo, the petition would not survive for consideration. Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn. It is needless to say that liberty is reserved to the petitioner to initiate fresh petition if any fresh cause of action arises.

¶29

Sd/JUDGE

¶30

Sri Surendran Thampi v. Karnataka Industrial Areas

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Surendran Thampi v. Karnataka Industrial Areas

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

Murali Sm Vs Karnataka State Bar Council

M/S Akhila Enterprises Vs the State of Karnataka

Abdul Khader Vs the Karnataka State Board

Mr Girish Kambadaraya Vs the Institute of Cost Accounting of India

Mohammed Haneef Vs Karnataka State Board of Wakf

Sri. D.K. Krishna Raju Vs General Manager