IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF APRIL 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.11915 OF 2019 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
DR. BHEEMASHANKAR S. NANDYAL PROPRIETOR M/S. SHRADDHA SCAN AND EYE CARE CENTRE BEHIND LIONS SCHOOL EXTENSION AREA BAGALKOT-587 101. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI MADHUKAR DESHPANDE, ADV.) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE SERVICES NO.105, I FLOOR, VIKAS SOUDHA BANGALORE-560 001.
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.
2. DISTRICT HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE OFFICER AND APPROPRIATE AUTHORITY OF BAGALKOT NEW GOVERNMENT COMPLEX MINI VIDHAN SOUDHA NAVANAGARA BAGALKOT-587 103. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI Y.D. HARSHA, A.G.A.) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-2 TO CONSIDER THE APPLICATION OF THE PETITIONER DATED 15.10.2018 (ANNEXURE-D) PCPNDT ACT AND PASS APPROPRIATE ORDERS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Sri Madhukar Deshpande, learned counsel for petitioner. Sri Y.D. Harsha, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 2.
2. The writ petition is admitted for hearing.
With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard finally.
3. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner inter alia seeks a direction to respondent No.2 to consider the application submitted by the petitioner dated 15.10.2018 under the provisions of Pre conception and Prenatal Diagnostic Technique (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for short).
4. When the matter was taken up for consideration today, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the writ petition be disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 to decide the application submitted by the petitioner dated 15.10.2018 in accordance with law by a speaking order within the time limit fixed under the Act.
5. On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 2 submitted that suitable action in accordance with law shall be taken on the application submitted by the petitioner dated 15.10.2018.
6. In view of the submissions made and in the facts of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.2 to consider the application dated 15.10.2018 submitted by the petitioner in accordance with law by a speaking order within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE ST