Dismissed¶29

Smt Pushpalatha @ Ankitha Kavya Gowda v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC12 Feb 2025WP/41643/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Dismissal for non-prosecution; writ petition GM-RES; Articles 226 and 227 Constitution of India; BESCOM; electricity supply; Kanakapura/Ramanagara; petitioner and counsel absent on listing; State of Karnataka Energy Department; Karnataka Electricity Regulatory Commission; Karnataka High Court 2025; WP No. 41643 of 2017; Jyoti Mulimani, J.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution, as the petitioner was not represented when the case was called on 27.01.2025 and again on 12.02.2025, and it appears the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the petition. ¶29

Smt Pushpalatha @ Ankitha Kavya Gowda Vs the… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

NC: 2025:KHC:6321 WP No. 41643 of 2017

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 41643 OF 2017 (GM-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SMT. PUSHPALATHA @ ANKITHA KAVYA GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, W/O. B.C. RAVI KUMAR RESIDING AT SY NO.48/7, B.S. DODDI VILLAGE & POST, HORALAGALLU POST, KASABA HOBLI, KANAKAPURA TALUK - 562 117 RAMANAGARA DISTRICT.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. PRAKASH T.HEBBAR, ADVOCATE [ABSENT])

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, ENERGY DEPARTMENT, Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M VIKASA SOUDHA, R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, Location: High BENGALURU - 560 001. Court of Karnataka

¶13

THE BENGALURU ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LIMITED, (WHOLLY OWNED GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA UNDERTAKING), GENERAL MANAGER (ELE), DSM, CORPORATE OFFICE, BESCOM, K.R.CIRCLE BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶14

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:6321 WP No. 41643 of 2017

¶15

THE BENGALURU ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPNAY LIMITED, (WHOLLY OWNED GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA UNDERTAKING), MANAGING DIRECTOR, DSM, CORPORATE OFFICE, BESCOM, K.R.CIRCLE, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶16

THE CHIEF ENGINEER (E) BRAZ, BESCOM, NO.12/34, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 444.

¶17

THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER (ELE), RAMANAGARA CIRCLE, BESCOM, TTMC BUILDING, KENGERI BUS STOP, BENGALURU - 560 060.

¶18

THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELE), C, O&M, KANAKAPURA, BESCOM, SANGAMA ROAD, KANAKAPURA - 562 117. RAMANAGARA DISTRICT.

¶19

THE KARNATAKA ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSIONER, 6^TH AND 7^TH FLOOR, MAHALAKSHMI CHAMBERS, NO.9/2, MG ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SRI. MANJUNATH RAYAPPA, AGA FOR R1; SRI. P. PRASANNA KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R-3, 4 AND 6; SMT. ARUNDATI., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. B.L.MAYANNA., ADVOCATE R7; SRI. RAKESH BHATT., ADVOCATE R2 & 5 (VC) )

¶22

¶23

NC: 2025:KHC:6321 WP No. 41643 of 2017

¶24

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

¶25

THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER:

¶26

ORAL ORDER

¶27

When the case is called, the petitioner is not represented. When the case is listed and called out, the advocate must be present. The absence may affect the case.

¶28

As could be seen form the daily order sheet, petition was listed on 27.01.2025, on that day, when the matter is called, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Hence, for appearance of counsel for the petitioner, the petition was ordered to be listed on 12.02.2025.

¶29

The petition is listed today for appearance of counsel for the petitioner. As already noted above, when the case is called, the petitioner is not represented. It appears that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the petition. Hence, the Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution.

¶30

Sd/(JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE

¶31

MRP List No.: 2 Sl No.: 22

Smt Pushpalatha @ Ankitha Kavya Gowda v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Pushpalatha @ Ankitha Kavya Gowda 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

Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation Vs the Assistant Labour Commissioner and the Appellate Authority

The Tapcms Limited Vs the Deputy Commissioner (Food)

Sri I M Vittalamurthy Vs Chief Conservator of Forest

Sri Thomas Jacob Vs Sri M Ramaiah

Sri Waquar Ali H M Vs Smt K v Bindu

Brigade Enterprises Limited Vs the State of Karnataka