IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU ON THE 16TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. G. PANDIT WRIT APPEAL NO.2808 OF 2018 (T-RES) BETWEEN:
1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, ENFORCEMENT-20, SOUTH ZONE, VANIJYA THERIGE KARYALAYA-11, VIVEKNAGAR, BENGALURU-560 047.
2. THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES VANIJYA THERIGE KARYALAYA-1, KALIDASA ROAD, GANDHINAGAR, BENGALURU-560 009.
... APPELLANTS (BY SRI VIKRAM HUILGOL, HCGP) AND:
M/S. PARSHWA GRANITE NO.72/1 AND 80, HARAPANAHALLI VILLAGE, JIGANI BANERGHATTA ROAD, NEAR JIGANI INDUSTRIAL AREA, BENGALURU-562 106, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR SRI RAKESH SOLANKI, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS.
... RESPONDENT THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961 PRAYING TO ALLOW THE WRIT APPEAL AND SET-ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 10/04/2018 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WRIT PETITION NO.34311 OF2017 (T-RES).
***** THIS WRIT APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, RAVI MALIMATH J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT Aggrieved by the order dated 10-4-2018 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.34311 of 2017, allowing the petition and directing respondent No.1 to consider the application of the petitioner in the light of the Judgment of the Division Bench passed in Writ Appeal No.6503 of 2017, the State is in appeal.
2. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the order of the learned Single Judge is erroneous.
That the finding has been recorded contrary to the order of the Division Bench.
3. On hearing learned counsels, we find it difficult to accept such a submission. The learned Single Judge has directed to consider the application of the petitioner in the light of the Judgment of the Division Bench in Writ Appeal No. No.6503 of 2017. The directions of the Division Bench are necessarily binding on respondent No.1 and nothing else. Therefore, the Judgment of the Division Bench would have to be considered while considering the application of the petitioner and nothing more. Under these circumstances, we find no ground to entertain this appeal. Hence, this appeal is dismissed.
Sd/- Sd/-
JUDGE JUDGE rsk/-