IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.57589 OF 2013 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
B. LINGEGOWDA S/O LATE BHUMIGOWDA AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS PWD CLASS I CONTRACTOR NO.2028, HALEHALLI MANDYA DISTRICT-571401.
(BY MR. R. CHANDRANNA, ADV.) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA R/BY ITS SECRETARY PUBLIC WORKS PORTS & INLAND WATER TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT BANGALORE-560 001.
2. CHIEF ENGINEER COMMUNICATION AND BUILDINGS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS, PORTS AND INLAND WATERS PWD BUILDING, K R CIRCLE BANGALORE-560 001.
3. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PWP & IWT DIVISION MANDYA-571 401.
4. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PWD DIVISION MANDYA-571 401.
… PETITIONER 5. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-01.
AMENDED AS PER DATED 20/1/2013.
(BY SMT. Y.D. HARSHA, AGA FOR R1 TO R5) - - -
… RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO PAY THE AMOUNT DUE TO THE PETITIONER VIDE ANN-A WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 18% P.M. FROM THE DATE OF DULE TILL ITS PAYMENT & ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Mr.R.Chandranna, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Mr.Y.D.Harsha, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 5.
2. The writ petition is admitted for hearing.
With consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the same is heard finally.
3. In this petition, the petitioner inter alia seeks a direction to the respondents to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner.
4. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he will submit a representation with regard to his grievance raised in the petition to the competent authority and the aforesaid authority be directed to decide the representation, which may be submitted by the petitioner by a speaking order. On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate submitted that if such a representation is made the same shall be dealt with in accordance with law.
5. In view of the submissions made and in the facts of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner that in case a representation is made to the competent authority, the same shall be decided by the competent authority within a period of four months from the date of receipt of such a representation. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE SS