The writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution was dismissed as withdrawn upon application by the petitioner's counsel.
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.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA
WRIT PETITION No.6493/2021 (LB - RES)
BETWEEN
MOHAMMED ILYAS AHMED AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS S/O LATE T. ABDUL KHAYYUM 2ND CROSS, VINAYAKANAGAR JC ROAD, TUMAKURU - 572 102
... PETITIONER
[BY SRI. VINAYA KEERTHY M., ADV.]
AND
2
... RESPONDENTS
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE SECOND RESPONDENT TO CONSIDER THE PETITIONERS REPRESENTATION DATE 08.03.2021 (ANNEXURE-J) AND ETC.,
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner files a
memo seeking to withdraw the writ petition.
Memo is placed on record.
The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn.
Sd/JUDGE
KG
Mohammed Ilyas Ahmed
Deputy Commissioner Tumakuru District
Joint Director Town and Country Planning
Karnataka Lake Conservation and Development Authority
M. Nagaprashanna
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
