Disposed

Sri. Siddaiah v. the Managing Director

Karnataka HC12 Jul 2024WP/5370/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A retired KSRTC employee sought a mandamus directing the Corporation to consider his representation dated 28.04.2023. The respondents agreed to consider it in accordance with law. The Court issued a mandamus to consider the representation within three months without expressing any opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Mandamus directing respondents to consider representation dated 28.04.2023 in accordance with law within three months.

Sri. Siddaiah Vs the Managing Director — Service and Employment | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:26902 WP No. 5370 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF JULY, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 5370 OF 2024 (S-KSRTC)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI. SIDDAIAH AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, S/O LATE JAVAREGOWDA, MARI THIMMANAHALLI VILLAGE, DODDA MAGGE POST, ARKALGUD TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT-573 201.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. NAVEEN KUMAR., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. S.B.MUKKANNAPPA., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶13

THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, K.S.R.T.C., CENTRAL OFFICES, K.H.ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BANALORE-560 027.

¶14

THE CHIEF ACCOUNTS OFFICER AND FINANCIAL ADVISER, K.S.R.T.C., CENTRAL OFFICES, K.H.ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BANALORE-560 027.

¶15

THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, K.S.R.T.C., HASSAN DIVISION, HASSAN-573 201.

¶16

…RESPONDENTS

¶17

(BY SMT. H.R.RENUKA., ADVOCATE)

¶18

¶19

NC: 2024:KHC:26902 WP No. 5370 of 2024

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS.

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

ORDER

¶23

Sri.Naveen Kumar., learned counsel on behalf of Sri.S.B.Mukkannappa., for the petitioner and Smt.H.R.Renuka., learned counsel for respondents have appeared in person.

¶24

Counsel Sri.Naveen Kumar., submits that a Writ of Mandamus may be ordered directing the respondents to consider the representation dated:28.04.2023 submitted by the petitioner vide Annexure-D.

¶25

Counsel Smt.H.R.Renuka., submits that if a direction is issued to the respondents, the Corporation would consider the representation dated:28.04.2023 submitted by the petitioner in accordance with the law.

¶26

The oral submission made on behalf of learned counsel for the respective parties is placed on record.

¶27

Mandamus is ordered. The respondents are directed to consider the representation dated:28.04.2023 vide

¶28

¶29

NC: 2024:KHC:26902 WP No. 5370 of 2024

¶30

Annexure-D in accordance with the law, within three months

¶31

from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order, if not already considered.

¶32

Resultantly, the Writ Petition is disposed of .

¶33

Needless to observe that this Court has not expressed

¶34

any opinion on the merits of the case.

¶35

Sd/JUDGE

¶36

MRP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27

Sri. Siddaiah v. the Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Siddaiah v. the Managing Director

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

B.D.Malleshappa Vs Divisional Controller

Sri P P Mohanan Vs M/S.Kiran Power Rectification Services

B Srinivasappa Vs the Managing Director

Central Board of Trustees Vs Sree Ganesh Gears

Bhojaraju S Vs the Managing Director

Ashwathappa Vs the Divisional Controller