Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Sri Manjunath E Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

Home
Karnataka HC
2025
Sri Manjunath E Vs the State of KarnatakaSri Manjunath E v. the State of Karnataka

Allowed¶44

Sri Manjunath E v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC9 Oct 2025WP/20336/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

WP No. 20336 of 2025 (GM-RES); NC: 2025:KHC:39861; High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru; decided 09.10.2025 by Suraj Govindaraj J.; writ of mandamus; compliance with Karnataka Information Commission order dated 13.03.2025; Public Information Officer, Assistant Controller of Legal Metrology (Tech); furnishing of affidavit within 15 days; non-implementation of second appellate authority order; Articles 226 and 227 Constitution of India; State of Karnataka Department of Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs; First Appellate Authority, Deputy Controller of Legal Metrology (Tech); compensation for delay and mental agony not adjudicated.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed; mandamus issued directing respondent No.2 (Public Information Officer, Assistant Controller of Legal Metrology (Tech)) to comply with the Karnataka Information Commission order dated 13.03.2025 by furnishing the affidavit within 15 days. The ancillary prayer for compensation (relief b) was not adjudicated.

Why is it important?

When an order is passed by the Karnataka Information Commission it is required for all concerned to follow the same; non-compliance unnecessarily compelled the petitioner to approach this Court. ¶38

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition allowed; mandamus issued directing respondent No.2 (Public Information Officer, Assistant Controller of Legal Metrology (Tech)) to comply with the Karnataka Information Commission order dated 13.03.2025 by furnishing the affidavit within 15 days. The ancillary prayer for compensation (relief b) was not adjudicated.

Issue for consideration

Whether respondent No.2 (Public Information Officer, Assistant Controller of Legal Metrology (Tech)) is required to comply with the order of the Karnataka Information Commission dated 13.03.2025 directing furnishing of the affidavit within 15 days. +1 more

Court's answer

When an order is passed by the Karnataka Information Commission it is required for all concerned to follow the same; non-compliance unnecessarily compelled the petitioner to approach this Court.

Ratio / Principle

A mandamus is issued directing respondent No.2 to comply with the order of the Karnataka Information Commission dated 13.03.2025 within 15 days.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Karnataka (Suraj Govindaraj, J.) allowed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India filed by a serving Joint Controller of Legal Metrology seeking enforcement of an order dated 13.03.2025 of the Karnataka Information Commission, the second appellate authority, which had directed the Public Information Officer, Assistant Controller of Legal Metrology (Tech) (respondent No.2) to furnish an affidavit within 15 days. Holding that an order passed by the Karnataka Information Commission is required to be followed by all concerned, and that non-compliance had unnecessarily driven the petitioner to Court, the Judge issued a mandamus directing respondent No.2 to comply with the Commission's order dated 13.03.2025 within 15 days. The petitioner's additional prayer for compensation for loss, hardship and damages arising from the delay and non-compliance was raised but not adjudicated.

A

1 -

NC: 2025:KHC:39861 WP No. 20336 of 2025

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

WRIT PETITION NO. 20336 OF 2025 (GM-RES)

BETWEEN:

SRI MANJUNATH E AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, WORKING AS JOINT CONTROLLER OF LEGAL METROLOGY, OFFICE OF THE JOINT CONTROLLER OF LEGAL METROLOGY, BENGALURU AND MYSORE DIVISION

PRESENTLY RESIDING AT NO.92, SIDDHARTHA, INDIRANAGAR, GANGANAHALLI MAIN ROAD, NAGASANDRA POST, BENGALURU 560 073

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. HOLABASAPPA HALAKERI.,ADVOCATE)

Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF FOOD, CIVIL SUPPLIES AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS, M.S. BUILDING, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.

THE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER, ASSISTANT CONTROLLER OF LEGAL METROLOGY(TECH), MAPANA SOUDHA, 4^TH FLOOR, NO.01, ALI ASKER ROAD, BENGALURU 560 052

THE FIRST APPEALLATE AUTHORITY,

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:39861 WP No. 20336 of 2025

HC-KAR

DEPUTY CONTROLLER OF LEGAL METROLOGY(TECH), MAPANA SOUDHA, 4^TH FLOOR, NO.01, ALI ASKER ROAD, BENGALURU 560 052

THE KARNATAKA INFORMATION COMMISSION, INFORMATION HOUSE NO. 306, THIRD FLOOR, DEVARAJ ARAS ROAD, VIKAS SOUDHA, WEST GATE 2, BENGALURU-560 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. SARITHA KULKARNI., AGA FOR R1 TO R3; SRI. G.B. SHARATH GOWDA., ADVOCATE FOR R4)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ORDER DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO. 2 TO COMPLY WITH THE ORDER OF THE KARNATAKA INFORMATION COMMISSION OR THE SECOND APPELLATE AUTHORITY I.E., THE RESPONDENT NO.4 BY ITS ORDER DATED 13.03.2025 DIRECTING TO FURNISH THE AFFIDAVIT WITH IN 15 DAYS AND ETC.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

ORAL ORDER

Learned AGA accepts notice for respondents No.1 to 3. Sri.G.B.Sharath Gowda., learned counsel is directed to accept notice for respondent No.4.

The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs;

a. Issue a writ of mandamus or order directing the respondent No.2, to comply with the order of the

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:39861 WP No. 20336 of 2025

HC-KAR

Karnataka Information Commission or the Second Appellate Authority i.e., the respondent No.4 by its order dated 13.03.2025 directing to furnish the affidavit within 15 days, (Annexure-A);

b. Issue a writ or order/direction or any other appropriate writ, directing the Respondents to compensate the petitioner for the loss, hardship, and damages suffered by him due to the unjustified delay, non-compliance, and arbitrary conduct in providing the information, which has caused mental agony, harassment, and deprivation of his fundamental rights.

c. Issue any other relief or relief/s and pass such other orders as this Hon’ble Court deems fit under the circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity.

The short grievance of the petitioner is that the order passed by the respondent No.4-Karnataka Information Commission on 13.03.2025 has not been implemented by the Public Information Officer of the Assistant Controller of Legal Metrology (Tech) by furnishing the affidavit so directed.

When an order is passed by the Karnataka Information Commission it is but required for all concerned to follow the same. The same not having been followed, the petitioner has unnecessarily been required to approach this Court.

4 -

NC: 2025:KHC:39861 WP No. 20336 of 2025

HC-KAR

In that view of the matter, I pass the following

ORDER

i. The writ petition is allowed .

ii. A mandamus is issued, directing respondent No.2

to comply with the order of Karnataka Information Commission dated 13.03.2025 within 15 days from today.

SD/(SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE

SR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7

Issues for consideration

2 issues framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether respondent No.2 (Public Information Officer, Assistant Controller of Legal Metrology (Tech)) is required to comply with the order of the Karnataka Information Commission dated 13.03.2025 directing furnishing of the affidavit within 15 days.¶37
The court held
When an order is passed by the Karnataka Information Commission it is required for all concerned to follow the same; non-compliance unnecessarily compelled the petitioner to approach this Court.ratio¶38
2.
Whether the respondents are liable to compensate the petitioner for loss, hardship and damages suffered due to unjustified delay, non-compliance and arbitrary conduct in providing the information (prayed for but not expressly adjudicated).medium confidence¶35

Statutes considered

1 provisions across 1 enactments

AI extract

Constitution of IndiaArticles 226 and 227¶25

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Order dated 13.03.2025 of the Karnataka Information Commission (second appellate authority) directing the Public Information Officer, Assistant Controller of Legal Metrology (Tech) (respondent No.2) to furnish the affidavit within 15 days, which respondent No.2 failed to implement.¶37
Karnataka Information Commission · 13.03.2025

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
Sri Manjunath E, aged about 59 years, working as Joint Controller of Legal Metrology, Office of the Joint Controller of Legal Metrology, Bengaluru and Mysore Division¶10
Holabasappa Halakeri
respondent
The State of Karnataka, Department of Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs, represented by its Principal Secretary¶16
Saritha Kulkarni
respondent
The Public Information Officer, Assistant Controller of Legal Metrology (Tech), Mapana Soudha, Bengaluru¶17
Saritha Kulkarni
respondent
The First Appellate Authority, Deputy Controller of Legal Metrology (Tech), Mapana Soudha, Bengaluru¶21
Saritha Kulkarni
respondent
The Karnataka Information Commission, represented by its Commissioner¶22
G.B. Sharath Gowda

Coram

AI extract

Suraj Govindarajauthor¶27

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Karnataka HC
Decided on: 9 Oct 2025 · October
Registered: 9 Jul 2025
Case no.: WP/20336/2025
CNR: KAHC010436742025
Topic: Writ and Judicial Review
Bench: Suraj Govindara
Disposal: ALLOWED
Case type: WP (GM-RES)

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Suraj Govindara

M/S Shwetha Industries Vs the State of Karnataka
8 Oct 2025
Lokesh. a @ Star Loki Vs State of Karnataka
8 Oct 2025
Mr Naveed Mohammed Vs State of Karnataka
8 Oct 2025
Sri Aveek Bid Vs the Union of India
9 Oct 2025
Sri. Vasanth N Vs State Bank of India
9 Oct 2025
Sri G Krishnamurthy Vs the Authorised Officer and Chief Manager
9 Oct 2025

Cite this judgement

Sri Manjunath E v. the State of Karnataka, WP/20336/2025 (KA), decided on 9 October 2025.

The High Court of Karnataka publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes1

Constitution of IndiaArticles 226 and 227

View all statutes

Procedural history1

Order dated 13.03.2025 of the Karnataka Information Commission (second appellate authority) directing the Public Information Officer, Assistant Controller of Legal Metrology (Tech) (respondent No.2) to furnish the affidavit within 15 days, which respondent No.2 failed to implement.Karnataka Information Commission · 13.03.2025

View full history

Bench / Coram

Suraj Govindaraj

Parties & counsel