IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.21986 OF 2019 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
KURUHINA SETTY KENDRA SANGHA (R), NO.5, SAKAMMA BHAVANA, DWARAKANATH ROAD (NEW HIGH SCHOOL ROAD), VISHWESHWARAPURAM, BANGALORE – 560 004.
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
(BY MR. MANJUNATH R, ADV. FOR MR. PANCHAM R.D., ADV.) AND:
1. THE UNION OF INDIA, SHASTRI BHAVAN, NEW DELHI – 110 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER.
2. MINISTRY OF SOCIAL JUSTICE AND EMPOWERMENT, SHASTRI BHAVAN, NEW DELHI – 110 001. REPRESENTED BY JOINT SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF INDIA.
3. NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR BACKWARD CLASSES, … PETITIONER MINISTRY OF SOCIAL JUSTICE AND EMPOWERMENT, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, TRIKOOT – 1, DHIKANJI CAMA PLACE, NEW DELHI – 110 001.
4. STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE – 560 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS DEPUTY SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT.
… RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.BALAKRISHNA, AGA FOR R4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-2 AND 3 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER VIDE ANNEXURE F, G AND J TO RECTIFY THE MISTAKE BY REPLACING THE NAME OF KURUSHINA SETTY TO KURUHINA SETTY, IN THE CENTRAL LISTS OF OBCs DATED 06.12.1999 AND DATED 16.01.2006 VIDE ANNEXURE – B AND C RESPECTIVELY ISSUED BY THE R-2.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Sri.Manjunath R, learned counsel for Sri.Pancham R.D, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Sri.B.Balakrishna, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.4.
2. Taking into account the order which this Court proposes to pass, it is not necessary to issue notice to the respondent Nos.1 to 3.
3. In this petition, the petitioner inter alia seeks for a direction to respondent Nos.2 and 3 to consider the representations submitted by the petitioner at Annexures – F, G and J.
4. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the writ petition be disposed of with a direction to the respondent Nos.2 and 3 to consider and decide the representations submitted by the petitioner in accordance with law.
5. In view of the aforesaid submission and in the facts of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent Nos.2 and 3 to consider and decide the representations submitted by the petitioner in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to all necessary parties, by a speaking order within a period of six weeks from today.
6. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the case.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE dn/-