Dismissed

K Ramesh v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC9 Oct 2023WP/20032/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka dismissed a writ petition filed by a petitioner who withdrew the matter with liberty to challenge an endorsement declining consideration of his representation. A co-petition was disposed off similarly with liberty to challenge the special land acquisition officer's orders.

What did the court decide?

The petition was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh petition challenging the endorsement dated 24.08.2022 (WP No. 20032 of 2022) and with liberty to challenge the amendment order (WP

K Ramesh Vs State of Karnataka — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

NC: 2023:KHC:36717 WP No. 20032 of 2022 C/W WP No. 23416 of 2022

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO. 20032 OF 2022 (LA-RES)

¶7

C/W

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO. 23416 OF 2022 (LA-KIADB)

¶9

IN WP NO.20032/2022

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶12

K. RAMESH, LATE KRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.754, 5^TH CROSS DIVANARAPALYA, GOKULA EXTENSION, BENGALURU - 560 054. MOBILE - 94485 11056 EMAIL : [email protected] [email protected]

¶13

(BY SRI. K. RAMESH, PARTY-IN-PERSON)

¶14

…PETITIONER

¶15

AND:

¶16

STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPTD. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶17

¶18

NC: 2023:KHC:36717 WP No. 20032 of 2022 C/W WP No. 23416 of 2022

¶19

BENGALURU METROL RAIL

¶20

CORPORATION LTD., B.M.T.C. COMPLEX, SHANTHINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 027. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SRI. K. KRISHNA, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶23

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R2 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED:19.08.2022 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ETC..,

¶24

IN WP NO.23416/2022

¶25

BETWEEN:

¶26

K. RAMESH, LATE KRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.754, 5^TH CROSS DIVANARAPALYA, GOKULA EXTENSION, BENGALURU - 560 054. MOBILE - 94485 11056 EMAIL : [email protected] [email protected]

¶27

…PETITIONER

¶28

(BY SRI. K. RAMESH, PARTY-IN-PERSON)

¶29

AND:

¶30

STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPTD. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA,

¶31

¶32

NC: 2023:KHC:36717 WP No. 20032 of 2022 C/W WP No. 23416 of 2022

¶33

DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶34

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, K.I.A.D.B., (METRO RAIL PROJECT), MAHARSHI ARVINDA BHAVANA, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶35

BMRCL, BMTC COMPLEX, K.H. ROAD, BENGALURU - 27, BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR CAUSE TITLE AMMENDED VIDE ORDER DATED:02.02.2023.

¶36

…RESPONDENTS

¶37

(BY SRI. YOGESH D NAIK, AGA FOR R1; SRI. P.V. CHANDRA SHEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2 SRI. K. KRISHNA, ADVOCATE FOR R3)

¶38

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R2 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED:19.08.2022 AND REMINDER DATED:27.09.2022 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND B AND ETC..,

¶39

THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,

¶40

THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶41

4 - NC: 2023:KHC:36717 WP No. 20032 of 2022 C/W WP No. 23416 of 2022

¶42

ORDER

¶43

IN WP No.20032/2022

¶44

Petitioner-party-in-person Sri. K Ramesh is present before this Court. He submits that though he had engaged the services of a counsel, on account of his ill health the counsel is not able to be present and that he has returned the file along with no objection vakalath.

¶45

The party-in-person submits that earlier he had filed representation dated 19.08.2022 seeking compensation

¶46

and damages in respect of his property in Sy.No.41/P measuring 133 sq mtrs and that the said representation has not been considered in accordance with law. However, by endorsement dated 24.08.2022 produced at Annexure-S the respondent-BMRCL declined to consider the said representation. He further submits that since the representation dated 19.08.2022 has already been rejected by the respondent-BMRCL, and in the present petition he has

¶47

again sought for direction for consideration of very same representation, he would withdraw this petition with liberty to

¶48

5 - NC: 2023:KHC:36717 WP No. 20032 of 2022 C/W WP No. 23416 of 2022

¶49

file a fresh petition challenging the endorsement dated 24.08.2022 produced at Annexure-S.

¶50

Submission taken on record.

¶51

Petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner- party- in- person to challenge the endorsement dated 24.08.022 produced at Annexure-S issued by respondent -BMRCL.

¶52

IN WP No.23416/2022

¶53

This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking direction to the respondent No.2-KIADB to consider the representation date 19.08.2022 and reminder dated 27.09.2022 produced at Annexure-A and B. The respondent No.2-KIADB has along with statement of objections produced endorsement dated 02.01.2023 at Annexure-R1 and order dated 28.03.2022.

¶54

Learned counsel for the respondent-KIADB submits

¶55

that the said order has been passed in view of the earlier order

¶56

6 - NC: 2023:KHC:36717 WP No. 20032 of 2022 C/W WP No. 23416 of 2022

¶57

that was passed at instance of the petitioner herein in W.P.No.564/2020 dated 06.04.2021 in which the respondentKIADB had been directed to redress grievance of the petitioner and to consider the representation dated 12.06.2019 which is produced at Annexure-G and K to Writ Petition. It is further submission of the learned counsel for the respondent-KIADB that the representation dated 19.08.2022 and the reminder on 27.09.2022 produced at Annexure-A and B in the instant petition, is mere repetition of earlier representations. He submits that since the respondent-KIADB already passed an order in compliance with earlier direction issued by this Court, re-consideration of the similar representations would be an exercise in futility. If the petitioner is aggrieved by said order, petitioner is at liberty to challenge the same in the manner known to law. In response petitioner-party-in-person submits that the petition may be disposed off with liberty to challenge the said order at Annexure-R1 and the order dated 28.03.2022 enclosed therewith.

¶58

Submission taken on record.

¶59

¶60

NC: 2023:KHC:36717 WP No. 20032 of 2022 C/W WP No. 23416 of 2022

¶61

Petition is disposed off with liberty to the petitioner -

¶62

party- in-person to challenge Annexure-R1 and the order dated

¶63

28.03.2022 enclosed therewith.

¶64

Sd/JUDGE

¶65

PHM

K Ramesh v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K Ramesh v. State 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

Siddalingaiah @ Siddalinge Gowda Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Mallesh Vs State of Karnataka

Ms H C Meena Rani Vs the Commissioner

Smt Gangalakshmamma Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri I M Omkar Vs State of Karnataka

Sri K N Shivashankar Vs State of Karnataka