Disposed¶40

Shri. Padmavati Grameenabhivruddhi Sansthe v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC25 Apr 2025WP/101101/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court Dharwad Bench; WP No. 101101 of 2025 (GM-POLICE); decided 25.04.2025 by Jyoti Mulimani, J.; certiorari against police endorsement dated 08.02.2025 (Annexure-L) refusing investigation; complaint closed as civil dispute held just and proper; mandamus against respondents 4 to 7 (police officials, Athani/Belagavi) declined; private respondents 8-13 (Teli family, Nandeshwar) claiming trusteeship; petitioner institution represented by Dr. Anand Upadhye; parties left to pursue civil remedies; Articles 226 and 227; no precedents cited.

What did the court decide?

The closure of the complaint by the police stating that the dispute is civil is just and proper; accordingly, certiorari against the endorsement is declined. ¶39

Shri. Padmavati Grameenabhivruddhi Sansthe Vs the… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC-D:6858 WP No. 101101 of 2025

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,

¶4

DHARWAD BENCH

¶5

DATED THIS THE 25^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO. 101101 OF 2025 (GM-POLICE)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SHRI. PADMAVATI GRAMEENABHIVRUDDHI SANSTHE MAHISHWADAGI, TAL. ATHANI, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DR. ANAND S/O CHINTAMANI UPADHYE, AGE. 40 YEARS, OCC. BUSINES AND AGRICULTURE, R/O: MAHISHAWADAGI, TAL. ATHANI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591 304.

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI. SADIQ.N.GOODWALA., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SAJID GOODWALA., ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R DEPARTMENT OF HOME, Location: HIGH M.S. BUILDING, COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU-560 001.

¶15

THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, BENGALURU, BENGALURU-560 001.

¶16

INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, NORTH REGION, BELAGAVI, DIST: BELAGAVI-590 001.

¶17

SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, BELAGAVI, DIST: BELAGAVI-590 001.

¶18

2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6858 WP No. 101101 of 2025

¶19

DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ATHANI, DIST: BELAGAVI-591 304.

¶20

THE CIRCLE POLICE INSPECTOR, ATHANI, DIST: BELAGAVI-591 304.

¶21

POLICE SUB-INSPECTOR, ATHANI, DIST: BELAGAVI-591 304.

¶22

SHRI. KADAPPA RAMAPPA TELI, AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: NANDESHWAR, TAL: ATHANI, DIST: BELAGAVI-591 304.

¶23

SHRI. SIDDAPPA RAMAPA TELI, AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/ O: NANDESHWAR, TAL: ATHANI, DIST: BELAGAVI-591 304.

¶24

SHRI. SIDARAY RAMAPPA TELI, AGE: 38 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/ O: NANDESHWAR, TAL: ATHANI, DIST: BELAGAVI-591 304.

¶25

SHRI. MALLAPPA KALLAPPA TELI, AGE: 56 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/ O: NANDESHWAR, TAL: ATHANI, DIST: BELAGAVI-591 304.

¶26

SHRI SHRISHAIL MALLAPPA TELI, AGE: 38 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/ O: NANDESHWAR, TAL: ATHANI, DIST: BELAGAVI-591 304.

¶27

SHRI. DHAREPPA MALLAPPA TELI, AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O NANDESHWAR, TAL: ATHANI, DIST: BELAGAVI-591 301.

¶28

…RESPONDENTS

¶29

(BY SRI. PRAVEEN.K.UPPAR., AGA FOR R1-7; SRI. PRASHANTH.S.KADADEVAR., ADVOCATE FOR R8-R13)

¶30

3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6858 WP No. 101101 of 2025

¶31

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS.

¶32

THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER:

¶33

ORAL ORDER

¶34

Sri.Sadiq N. Goodwala, counsel on behalf of Sri.Sajid Goodwala, for the petitioner, Sri.Praveen K. Uppar, AGA for respondents 1 to 7 and Sri. Prashant S. Kadadevar, counsel for respondents 8 to 13, appeared in person.

¶35

The captioned Writ Petition is filed seeking a Writ of Certiorari to quash the endorsement dated 08.02.2025 issued by the seventh respondent vide Annexure-L and a Writ of Mandamus directing respondents 4 to 7 to take appropriate action against respondents 8 to 13 forthwith.

¶36

Counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the writ papers with care.

¶37

The petitioner contended that respondents 8 to 13, claiming themselves to be trustees of the petitioner – Institution, gathered in the school premises on 07.02.2025 and

¶38

4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6858 WP No. 101101 of 2025

¶39

08.02.2025 and created an unpleasant atmosphere and thereby caused disturbance. Hence, the petitioner was constrained to give a complaint to the Police Authority. An endorsement was issued by the Police Official stating that the dispute is civil. In my view, the closure of the complaint stating that the dispute is civil is just and proper. If the petitioner and respondents 8 to 13 have any grievance as against each other, they may take recourse under the law for redressal of their grievance at an appropriate point in time, if so advised.

¶40

5. Resultantly, the Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶41

Because of the disposal of the Writ Petition, pending interlocutory applications, if any, are disposed of, and the interim order granted by this Court, if any, stands discharged.

¶42

Sd/(JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE

¶43

MRP/RH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29

Shri. Padmavati Grameenabhivruddhi Sansthe v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri. Padmavati Grameenabhivruddhi Sansthe v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt.Girija W/O Girish Gacchinamani Vs Smt.Tippavva @ Laxmavva W/O Nagappa Devagiri

Shri M J Pradeep Vs the Commissioner

Competent Officer and Chief Officer Vs Sri.Dinakar S/O Keshav Shetty

Mukesh S/O Dattoba Mahendrakar Vs Dattatreya S/O Ramachandra Shalgar

Sri. Shivaprasad M. S/O Late Mallaiah Vs Karnataka State Information Commission

Raju S/O Dundappa Padmannavar Vs Commissioner City Corporation