Disposed¶43

Sri Ramesh S/O Sadashiv Ittappanavar v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC11 Feb 2025WP/100394/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Mandamus petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution seeking action by the Tahasildar, Mudhol on a report against HESCOM officials (Mudhol PS A F No.05/2022 dated 11/11/2022, Annexure-G) made after an accident of 02.06.2022 at the petitioner's Appaji Palace Bakery; petition disposed of without entering merits, with direction to consider the representation within 3 months; counsel: Kirankumar S. Chattimath (petitioner), Sharad V. Magadum AGA (State); keywords: HESCOM, electricity accident, representation, mandamus, GM-RES, Karnataka HC Dharwad, M. Nagaprasanna.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Respondent No.2 to consider the petitioner's representation/complaint in accordance with law within an outer limit of three months from receipt of a copy of the order, if not earlier. ¶43

Sri Ramesh S/O Sadashiv Ittappanavar Vs the State… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC-D:2689 WP No. 100394 of 2025

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 11^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 100394 OF 2025 (GM-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRI. RAMESH S/O. SADASHIV ITTAPPANAVAR, AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: KULALI, TQ: MUDHOL, DIST: BAGALKOT- 587113.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. KIRANKUMAR S. CHATTIMATH, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by VISHAL NINGAPPA PATTIHAL Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

¶15

REP BY ITS ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY,

¶16

M. S. BUILDING, BENGALURU- 01.

¶17

THE TAHASILDAR, MUDHOL TALUK, MUDHOL, BAGALKOT- 587313.

¶18

THE POLICE SUB INSPECTOR, MUDHOL POLICE STATION, MUDHOL, BAGALKOT- 587101.

¶19

THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, HESCOM SUB DIVISION MUDHOL,

¶20

¶21

NC: 2025:KHC-D:2689 WP No. 100394 of 2025

¶22

BAGALKOT- 587101.

¶23

THE DEPUTY ELECTRICITY INSPECTOR BAGALKOT- 587101.

¶24

…RESPONDENTS

¶25

(BY SRI SHARAD V. MAGADUM, AGA)

¶26

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA IS PRAYING TO, TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.2 TO TAKE THE FURTHER ACTION ON THE REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 IN MUDHOL PS A F NO.05/2022 DATED 11/11/2022 VIDE ANNEXURE-G. TO ISSUE ANY OTHER WRIT OR DIRECTION AS THIS HON’BLE COURT MAY DEEM FIT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶27

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

¶28

ORAL ORDER

¶29

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA)

¶30

The petitioner is before this Court seeking the

¶31

following prayer:

¶32

a) To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondent No.2 to take further action on the report submitted by the respondent no.3 in Mudhol PS A F no.05/2022 dated 11/11/2022 vide Annexure-G.

¶33

b) To issue any other writ or direction as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the interest of justice and equity.

¶34

3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2689 WP No. 100394 of 2025

¶35

Heard the learned counsel Sri.Kirankumar S. Chattimath appearing for the petitioner and the learned AGA Sri.Sharad V.Magadum appearing for the respondentState.

¶36

An accident happens on 02.06.2022 in Appaji Palace Bakery, owned by the petitioner. The petitioner appears to have submitted a report against the officials of HESCOM and therefore the petitioner submits a representation to the State to take appropriate action upon the report. Non-taking of the action has driven the petitioner to this Court in the subject petition.

¶37

The learned AGA on instructions would submit that the representation of the petitioner would be considered and an appropriate order would be passed, in accordance with law, if reasonable time is granted.

¶38

In the light of the said submission, without going into the merit of the claim of the petitioner, I deem it appropriate to dispose the petition, directing consideration of the representation/complaint of the petitioner in accordance with law within an outer limit of 3

¶39

¶40

NC: 2025:KHC-D:2689 WP No. 100394 of 2025

¶41

months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order,

¶42

if not earlier.

¶43

Ordered accordingly.

¶44

Sd/(M.NAGAPRASANNA)

¶45