Dismissed

M/S Spi Green Energy v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC18 Jul 2022WP/3797/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution seeking to quash orders passed by Respondents with the Karnataka Renewable Energy Development Ltd. The Court allowed withdrawal of the petition with liberty to approach Respondent No. 1 for redressal.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to approach Respondent No. 1 for redressal.

M/S Spi Green Energy Vs the State of Karnataka — Service and Employment | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF JULY, 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE Mr. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶6

WRIT PETITION No.3797 OF 2022 (GM – KEB)

¶7

BETWEEN :

¶8

M/S. SPI GREEN ENERGY, A LLP, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.3, SUBBA RAO AVENUE COLLEGE ROAD, CHENNAI – 600 006. THROUGH ITS GPA HOLDER SHRI D.S.PRADIP.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SMT.SUMANGALA GACHCHINAMATH, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.GURUDEV I GACHCHINAMATH, ADVOCATE) (PH)

¶11

AND :

¶12

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ITS SECRETARY TO ENERGY DEPARTMENT, VIKAS SOUDHA, VIDHANA VEEDHI, BENGALURU – 1.

¶13

THE KARNATAKA RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT LTD., NO.39, SHANTI GRUHA BHARATH SCOUTS AND GUIDES BUILDING, OPP.THE CHIEF POST MASTER, GENERAL OFFICE,

¶14

¶15

PALACE ROAD, BENGALURU - 01.

¶16

...RESPONDENTS

¶17

(BY SMT.JYOTHI BHAT, HCGP FOR R1; SRI.SAMARTH KASHYAP, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 19.1.2022 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE - K PASSED BY THE R1 AND ALSO THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 16.11.2011 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE - H PASSED BY THE R2 AND ETC.,

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR DICTATION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

ORDER

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo seeking leave of this Court to withdraw the petition, reserving liberty to approach respondent No.1 for redressal of their grievance.

¶22

2. Memo is placed on record.

¶23

Accordingly, the petition is dismissed as withdrawn reserving liberty to approach respondent No.1 for redressal of the petitioner's grievance which is impugned in this writ petition. If such representation is submitted by the

¶24

¶25

petitioner with the respondent No.1, respondent No.1 shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of representation to be submitted.

¶26

Sd/JUDGE

¶27

M/S Spi Green Energy v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Spi Green Energy v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri N Jayaram Vs State of Karnataka

Sri J a Mahaveer Vs Assistant Executive Engineer

Sri Narayana Naika P Vs the State of Karnataka

Rosemary Ratnam Vs Anam Hussain (Minor)

Sri.D. Chandrashekara Vs the State of Karnataka by

Rishi Ventures Vs Jayees Steels