Allowed

Prakash S/O Shankar Mirji v. the State of Karnataka and Ors.

Karnataka HC23 Oct 2024WP/200455/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition challenged an endorsement refusing to remove the petitioner from the rowdy sheeters' list. Finding the prescribed procedure under a prior High Court judgment was not followed, the court quashed the endorsement, ordered deletion of the name within four weeks and reserved liberty to proceed per guidelines.

What did the court decide?

Endorsement dated 14.01.2019 quashed; petitioner's name to be deleted from rowdy sheeters' list within four weeks; liberty reserved to proceed following B.S. Prakash guidelines.

Prakash S/O Shankar Mirji Vs the State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC-K:7817 WP No. 200455 of 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,

¶3

KALABURAGI BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 200455 OF 2022 (GM-POLICE)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRI. PRAKASH S/O SHANKAR MIRJI, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, OCC. MEMBER, VIJAYPUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, WARD-14 R/O STATION BACK ROAD, SHIKHARKHANA, VIJAYPUR-586 101

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. S. S. MAMADAPUR, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by SUMITRA SHERIGAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME,

¶15

VIDHAN SOUDHA, BANGALURU-01

¶16

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, DIST. VIJAYAPURA-586 201,

¶17

THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDANT OF POLICE, VIJAYAPURA-586 101

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(SMT. MAYA T.R., HCGP FOR RESPONDENTS)

¶20

2 - NC: 2024:KHC-K:7817 WP No. 200455 of 2022

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ORDER OR ANY OTHER DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF A WRIT QUASHING THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 14.01.2019 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT - 3 AS PER ANNEXURE- C IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY, ETC.,

¶22

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR)

¶25

In this petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs:

¶26

“(a) Wherefore, the petitioner most humbly prays that the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or order or any other direction in the nature of a writ quashing the endorsement dated 14.01.2019 issued by the respondent No.3 as per Annexure-C in the interest of justice and equity.

¶27

(b) Grant such other reliefs as this Hon’ble Court deems fit to grant under the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity.”

¶28

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

¶29

learned counsel for the respondent and perused the material on record.

¶30

In addition to reiterating the various

¶31

contentions urged in the petition and referring to the material on record, the learned counsel for the petitioner

¶32

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-K:7817 WP No. 200455 of 2022

¶33

submits that, despite the petitioner submitting representations at Annexures-A and B, dated 07.09.2019, requesting his name to be deleted from the rowdy sheeters’ list, the respondent No.3 has issued the impugned endorsement refusing to delete the name of the petitioner from the rowdy sheeters’ list without following

¶34

the procedure prescribed by this Court in the case of B.S.Prakash Vs. State of Karnataka and others, reported in 2022 (2) KAR L.R. 457. It is therefore submitted that the impugned endorsement at Annexure-C dated 14.01.2019 deserves to be quashed.

¶35

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submits that there is no merit in the petition and the same deserves to be dismissed.

¶36

As rightly contended by learned counsel for the petitioner, before including the name of the petitioner in the rowdy sheeters’ list and prior to issuing the impugned endorsement at Annexure-C dated 14.01.2019, the respondents have not followed the procedure prescribed

¶37

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-K:7817 WP No. 200455 of 2022

¶38

by this Court in the case of B.S.Prakash (supra) and consequently, the impugned endorsement deserves to be quashed and liberty be reserved in favour of the respondent to proceed further by following the guidelines in the case of B.S.Prakash (supra).

¶39

In the result, I pass the following:

¶40

ORDER

¶41

i) Petition is hereby allowed and disposed of in

¶42

terms of the judgment of this Court in B.S. Prakash Vs. State of Karnataka and others – 2022 (2) KAR L.R. 457.

¶43

ii) The impugned endorsement at Annexure–C dated 14.01.2019 passed by respondent No.3, is hereby quashed.

¶44

iii) Liberty is reserved in favour of the concerned respondents to proceed further, by following the guidelines in the case of B.S. Prakash Vs. State of Karnataka and others – 2022 (2) KAR L.R. 45.

¶45

¶46

NC: 2024:KHC-K:7817 WP No. 200455 of 2022

¶47

(iv) The concerned respondents are directed to

¶48

remove, exclude and delete the name of the petitioner

¶49

from the rowdy sheeters’ list, within a period of four weeks

¶50

from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.

¶51

Sd/(S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE

¶52

SVH

¶53

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 53

Prakash S/O Shankar Mirji v. the State of Karnataka and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prakash S/O Shankar Mirji v. the State of Karnataka and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Laxman Vs the Deputy Commissioner and Ors.

Shantappa Vs Suman @ Bhagyashree and Ors.

Mohammed Ali @ Maula Ali and Ors. Vs Dr Ehtaisham Rahi and Anr.

Dastagir and Ors. Vs the Managing Director and Ors.

Mohammed Zakir Hussain, Vs Karnataka State Board of Auqaf

Rajesh Hagargi S/O Prabhakar Rao Hagargi Vs the Divisional Manager and Anr.