Disposed

Sri Vatal Nagaraj v. the Government of Karnataka

Karnataka HC13 Sept 2021WP/6765/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition filed seeking direction to authorities to provide Y+ Escort Security. The High Court directed the Commissioner of Police to consider the petitioner's representations and inform him of the result expeditiously.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Commissioner of Police, Bengaluru City, to consider the petitioner's representations dated 12.02.2021 and inform him of the result expeditiously.

Sri Vatal Nagaraj Vs the Government of Karnataka — Service and Employment | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2021

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.6765 OF 2021(GM-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI.VATAL NAGARAJ, AGED ABOUT 81 YEARS, S/O LATE MADAPPA, NO.329, 2^ND CROSS, 2^ND STAGE, RMV, BENGALURU – 560 094.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. M.T.NANAIAH, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. VISHNU HEGDE, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶13

THE HOME SECRETARY & ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR.AMBEDKAR ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶14

THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶15

THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, BENGALURU CITY, INFANTRY ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶16

… RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B V KRISHNA, AGA)

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO

¶18

¶19

DIRECT THE R1 TO 4 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATIONS DATED 12.02.2021 MADE BY THE PETITIONER I.E., ANNEXURE-A TO D AND DIRECT THE R1 TO PROVIDE THE Y PLUS ESCORT SECURITY TO THE PETITIONER.

¶20

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

¶21

ORDER

¶22

The short grievance of the petitioner is as to nonconsideration of his representations dated 12.02.2021 copies whereof are respectively at Annexures A to D wherein he has sought for “Y+ Escort Security” to him.

¶23

Learned AGA appearing for the official respondents vehemently opposes the writ petition contending that security of the kind cannot be extended to one and all for an askance, since it involves deployment of police personnel and the huge expenses on the part of State occasioned by such deployment; he also submits that there are broad Policy Guidelines which regulate providing of escort security and that petitioner’s representations would be considered in accordance with the same. This is a fair gesture.

¶24

In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed off directing the fourth respondent – Commissioner of Police, Bengaluru City, to consider the

¶25

¶26

subject representations of the petitioner and inform him of the result of such consideration as expeditiously as possible.

¶27

All contentions are kept open.

¶28

It is open to the fourth respondent to solicit any information/documents from the petitioner for due consideration of the subject representations; however, in the guise of such solicitation, delay shall not be brooked.

¶29

Now, no costs.

¶30

Sd/JUDGE

¶31

Bsv

Sri Vatal Nagaraj v. the Government of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Vatal Nagaraj v. the Government 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

S Narmada Vs State of Karnataka

Sultana Parveen Vs the Secretary

Kenchappa Vs the State of Karnataka

E H Basavaraj Vs Sharaz Mujahid Siddiqi

Shri Ramachandrapura Matha Vs State of Karnataka

Anjanapura Madivalara Abivrudhi Sangha Vs State of Karnataka