Allowed

Smt. Manjula v. Bhruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike

Karnataka HC10 Mar 2022WP/12263/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Lok Adalat of the Karnataka High Court allowed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 regarding the delayed disposal of an appeal. The Court directed the Appeals Committee to dispose of the specific appeal within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

A writ of mandamus was issued directing the respondent to dispose of the appeal at Annexure 'H' within eight weeks.

Smt. Manjula Vs Bhruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike — Service and Employment | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

HIGH COURT LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE, BENGALURU BEFORE THE LOK ADALAT

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 10^th DAY OF MARCH, 2022

¶5

CONCILIATORS PRESENT:

¶6

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B. VEERAPPA

¶7

¶8

SRI. M.N. UMASHANKAR, MEMBER

¶9

W.P. No. 12263/2016 (LB-BMP) (Lok Adalat No. 43/2022)

¶10

BETWEEN

¶11

Smt. Manjula W/o M. Krishna Murthy, Aged about 40 years, Residing at No.292, Kaikondrarahalli Village, Sarjapura Road, Carmelaram Post, Bengaluru – 560 034.

¶12

...PETITIONER

¶13

(By Sri. : H.V. Praveen Gowda, Advocate)

¶14

AND

¶15

1 . Bhruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike, Corporation Circle, Bengaluru – 560 001, Represented by its Commissioner.

¶16

The Executive Engineer, BBMP, Mahadevapura

¶17

¶18

Sub-Division, Mahadevapura, Bengaluru-560 034.

¶19

Assistant Director, City Planning, BBMP, Mahadevapura, Bengaluru-560 048.

¶20

Appeals Committee, Corporation Circle, BBMP, Bengaluru – 560 001, Represented by its Chairman. RESPONDENTS

¶21

(By Smt. Sumangala Gachchinamath, Advocate for R-1 to R-4)

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.4 TO CONSIDER THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER AS PER ANNEXURE ‘H’ IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW WITHIN A STIPULATED TIME..

¶23

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR CONCILIATION BEFORE LOK ADALAT, THE FOLLOWING CONCILIATION ORDER IS PASSED:

¶24

CONCILIATION ORDER

¶25

The petitioner has filed the present writ petition sought for a writ of

¶26

mandamus directing the respondents No.4 to consider the appeal filed at Annexure ‘H’.

¶27

Though the matter is of the year 2016 the Appellate Authority would have to dispose of the appeal within a reasonable time. The same has not been

¶28

¶29

done and also the respondents have not filed any objections. Therefore, there

¶30

is no impediment for this Authority to issue a mandamus directing the

¶31

respondent No.4 to consider the prayer sought by the petitioner.

¶32

In view of the above, we pass the following :

¶33

ORDER

¶34

The Writ Petition is allowed and a writ of mandamus is issued directing the respondent No.4 to dispose of the appeal at Annexure ‘H’, if not already disposed of, within a period of eight weeks in accordance with law from the date of receipt of copy of this order without giving room for further

proceedings.

Sd/JUDGE

Sd/MEMBER

Rbv

Smt. Manjula v. Bhruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Manjula v. Bhruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike

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

Rajakumar S/O Siddanna Vs Nekrtc

Siddanna Vs Amaresh and Anr.

Shivanna Vs Divisional Controller

Mr. D.G. Umesh Vs the Commissioner

Mr. K. Balakrishna Vs the Commissioner

D Thyappa Vs the Commissioner