Writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution prayed directing respondents to consider a representation. Court dismissed the petition for non-prosecution as no representation existed for petitioners.
None. Petition dismissed for non-prosecution due to absence of representation for petitioners.
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 2ND DAY OF JUNE, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE R.NATARAJ
WRIT PETITION NO.49155/2015 (LB-RES)
BETWEEN:
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. K. RAGUPATHY, ADVOCATE (ABSENT))
AND:
2
DEPARTMENT OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION, VIKAS SOUDHA, BANGALORE – 560 001.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. V.S. KALASURMATH, HCGP FOR R1-3 SRI. J.G. CHANDRA MOHAN, ADVOCATE FOR R4)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-2 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DTD.22.9.2015 VIDE ANNEX-A SUBMITTED TO THE R-2.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING - B GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
3
ORDER
Learned High Court Government Pleader accepts notice for respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3.
does not survive for consideration.
non-prosecution.
Sd/JUDGE
SMJ
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition should be dismissed due to lack of representation before the respondent authority.
Sri Muraligowda S. R.
Sri Rauth Shankarappa
The State of Karnataka
Department of Municipal Administration
The Regional Commissioner Bangalore Division
The Deputy Commissioner Kolar District
R. Nataraj
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
