Writ petition challenging a charge memo and seeking retirement benefits was withdrawn by the petitioner, as further documents relating to the charge memo were served after filing.
Liberty to withdraw the petition and file a fresh writ petition on the same cause of action, subject to just exceptions in law.
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.
NC: 2024:KHC:26631 WP No. 16314 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JULY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 16314 OF 2024 (S-RES)
BETWEEN:
SRI. TERENCE FRANCIS S/O LATE FRANCIS J AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.14, T M R COLONY, JEEVANBHIMA NAGAR BENGALURU-560075
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. B S GAUTHAM.,ADVOCATE) AND:
Digitally signed by ANAND N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
NC: 2024:KHC:26631 WP No. 16314 of 2024
KOLAR - 563 101.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.PRINCE ISAC., AGA FOR R1)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO i) QUASH THE CHARGE MEMO, IMPUTATION OF CHARGES AND LIST OF WITNESSES AND DOCUMENTS ISSUED BY MANAGING DIRECTOR KARNATAKA STATE MAHARSHI VALMIKI SCHEDULED TRIBES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., COPIES OF WHICH ARE PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-F AND CONSEQUENTLY DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO SETTLE THE RETIREMENT BENEFITS OF THE PETITIONER EXPEDITIOUSLY.OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE. ii) DIRECTION DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION / EXPLANATION DATED 25/11/2023 A COPY OF WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-G AND DISPOSE OF THE SAME IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
NC: 2024:KHC:26631 WP No. 16314 of 2024
ORDER
The learned counsel for the petitioner files a memo for withdrawal, and he seeks liberty to file a fresh writ petition on the same cause of action. When queried about the reason for such liberty, the learned counsel submits that the present petition is filed calling in question the issuance of charge memo but after the charge memo is served, the petitioner is served with certain further documents relating to the charge memo and hence the liberty.
On a careful consideration of these
submissions, the petitioner must be permitted to withdraw the petition, and liberty to file a fresh petition on the same cause of action is granted subject to just exceptions in law.
It is ordered accordingly.
AN/-
SD/JUDGE
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Terence Francis
State of Karnataka
The Managing Director, Karnataka Maharshi Valmiki Scheduled Tribes Development Corporation Limited
Karnataka State Maharshi Valmiki Scheduled Tribes Development Corporation
B M Shyam Prasad
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
