Dismissed¶39

Smt. Vidya v. the Commissioner

Karnataka HC8 Jan 2026WP/8371/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Tumakuru Mahanagara Palike notice challenge; Sri Venkateshwara Tea Stall proprietor; Red Cross Bhavan, Ashoka Road, Tumakuru; Sony India authorised dealer (R4); notice/direction dated 12.02.2019, File No: TMP/TS/CR-86/2018-19; Articles 226 and 227; writ of certiorari; withdrawal memo; dismissed as infructuous; High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru; Suraj Govindaraj J.; decided 08-01-2026; WP No. 8371 of 2019 (LB-RES).

What did the court decide?

None; writ petition dismissed as infructuous following counsel's memo seeking withdrawal ¶39

Smt. Vidya Vs the Commissioner — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

NC: 2026:KHC:1011 WP No. 8371 of 2019

¶2

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 8371 OF 2019 (LB-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SMT. VIDYA WIFE OF SHRI. N. LOKESH AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, (PROPRIETOR) SRI. VENKATESHWARA TEA STALL, NORTH SIDE IN RED CROSS BHAVAN, ASHOKA ROAD, TUMAKURU - 572 101.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. KRISHNA NAIK, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

THE COMMISSIONER TUMAKURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE TUMAKURU - 572 101.

¶14

Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

THE ASSISTNAT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER TUMAKURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE TUMAKURU - 572 101.

¶16

THE HEALTH OFFICER TUMAKURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE TUMAKURU - 572 101.

¶17

VINAY H.V S/O VASANTHA KUMAR AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS (AUTHORISED DEALER SONY INDIA PVT. LTD.) SHOP NO. 101 TO 103 AND 142

¶18

¶19

NC: 2026:KHC:1011 WP No. 8371 of 2019

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

INDIAN RED CROSS BHAVAN ASHOKA ROAD, CHURCH CIRCLE, TUMAKURU - 572 101.

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SRI. SUBRAMANYA R, ADVOCATE FOR R1-R3; SRI. M. NARAYANA BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR R4)

¶24

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE NOTICE/DIRECTION DATED 12.02.2019 ISSUED BY THE R-2 TO THE PETITIONER ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.,

¶25

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

¶26

ORAL ORDER

¶27

Petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following

¶28

reliefs:

¶29

(a) Call for records;

¶30

(b) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ, order or direction quashing the notice/direction dated 12-022019 issued by the 2nd respondent in No: TMP/TS/CR-86/2018-19 to the petitioner Annexure A.

¶31

(c) Direct the Respondents to pay the cost of these proceedings;

¶32

(d) Issue any other writ, order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may "eem appropriate in the circumstances of the case, to meet the ends of Justice.

¶33

¶34

NC: 2026:KHC:1011 WP No. 8371 of 2019

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo, seeking permission of the Court to withdraw the writ petition. The said memo reads as follows:

¶37

"The Advocate for the Petitioner requesting this Hon'ble Court may kindly to withdraw the above case as infructuous in the interest of justice and equity."

¶38

Accepting the said memo and the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petition is

¶39

dismissed as infructuous.

¶40

SD/(SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE

¶41

GJM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 34

Smt. Vidya v. the Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Vidya v. the Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri K K Aiyappa Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. P. Babulal Vs the Chief Commissioner

Sri Narayanappa Gowda Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Hajimastan Vs State by

Shri Varnit Jain Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Susheela Vs State of Karnataka