Dismissed

H. Narasimhamurthy v. the Secretary Regional Transport Authority

Karnataka HC28 Aug 2024WP/22382/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging the State Transport Appellate Tribunal's refusal to grant the petitioner a temporary permit from 30.04.2024 to 31.07.2024 was dismissed as infructuous since the permit period had lapsed. The court directed respondent No.5 to consider the petitioner's pending application for a temporary permit from 01.08.2024 to 30.11.2024 in accordance with law within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Respondent No.5 directed to consider the petitioner's Annexure-M application for temporary permit (01.08.2024 to 30.11.2024) in accordance with law within six weeks.

H. Narasimhamurthy Vs the Secretary Regional… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:34623 WP No. 22382 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 28^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO. 22382 OF 2024 (MV-)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

H. NARASIMHAMURTHY, S/O LATE H.B. HANUMANTHAPPA, AGE ABOUT 59 YEARS, NO. 860/5, 1ST STAGE, 3RD MAIN, SHIVAKUMARASWAMY NAGAR, DAVANAGERE-577003, BY G.P.A HOLDER R.P. DEVARAJ, S/O R.M. PALAKSHAPPA, NO.66, AJJIHALLI POST, CHANNAGIRI TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. B R SUNDARA RAJA GUPTA, ADVOCATE)

¶11

Digitally signed by MAHALAKSHMI B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

AND:

¶13

THE SECRETARY REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, DAVANAGERE - 577 003.

¶14

SMT NAGARATHNA S.R., W/O LATE BALAKRISHNA RAO, AGED ABOURT 70 YEARS, R/AT 55, 6TH CROSS,

¶15

A BLOCK DEVARAJA URS LAYOUT, DAVANAGERE -577 006.

¶16

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:34623 WP No. 22382 of 2024

¶17

C. RAMESH, S/O ANEYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, PROP: SRI THIRTHA RAMESHWARA MOTOR SERVICE, T.B. ROAD, CHANNAGIRI, DAVANAGERE -577 213.

¶18

G.S. SUDEEP, S/O G.C. SHIVAMURTHY, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, DOOR NO.3992/122A, 16TH CROSS, 1ST FLOOR, ANJINEYA BADAVANE, DAVANAGERE - 577 213.

¶19

REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,

¶20

DAVANGERE 577 003, BY IT'S SECRETORY.

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SRI. K. MANJUNATH, HCGP FOR R1 & R5; SRI. R. LOKESH, ADVOCATE FOR C/R2; SRI. A. S. PARASARA KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR C/R4; NOTICE NOT ORDERED IN R/O R3)

¶23

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER OF THE KARNATAKA STATE TRANSPORT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MARKED UNDER ANNEXURE-L PASSED IN RP NOS.42, 44 AND 45/2024 DATED 31.07.2024 BY ISSUE OF A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION AND ETC.,

¶24

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶25

¶26

NC: 2024:KHC:34623 WP No. 22382 of 2024

¶27

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

¶28

ORAL ORDER

¶29

The present petition is filed to quash the order passed by the Karnataka State Transport Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as "Appellate Tribunal" for short) at Annexure-L in review petition Nos.42, 44 and 45 of 2024 dated 31.07.2024, whereby, the Appellate Tribunal refused to grant temporary permit from 30.04.2024 to 31.07.2024.

¶30

The temporary permit sought by the petitioner was from 30.04.2024 to 31.07.2024, due to the passage of time, the temporary permit sought by the petitioner has lapsed and the present petition has become infructuous and accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous.

¶31

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner files I.A. under Order XLI Rule 27 read with Section 151 CPC seeking to produce the application filed by the

¶32

¶33

NC: 2024:KHC:34623 WP No. 22382 of 2024

¶34

petitioner before the authority in respect of temporary

¶35

permit from 01.08.2024 to 30.11.2024.

¶36

It is the grievance of the petitioner that in light of the order passed in review petition by the Appellate Tribunal, the appropriate authority is not considering the application filed by the petitioner seeking for temporary permit from 01.08.2024 to 30.11.2024.

¶37

It is needless to observe that respondent No.5appropriate authority to consider the application of the petitioner at Annexure-M in accordance with law, within an

¶38

outer limit of six weeks from the date of release of this order.

¶39

Sd/(K.S. HEMALEKHA) JUDGE

¶40

AT List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11 CT:BHK

H. Narasimhamurthy v. the Secretary Regional Transport Authority

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

H. Narasimhamurthy v. the Secretary Regional Transport Authority

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

Sri.B.P.Venkatesh Vs the Management of

Sri Krishnappa Vs Smt Ningamma

Sri.Guruprasad S L Vs M/S Karnataka Malladi Biotics Ltd.

Sri C v Jayaramegowda Vs the Tahsildar

The Executive Engineer (Ele) Vs a B Bore Gowda

Sri.Shivakumar Vs State of Karnataka