Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Smt Manjula W/O Channabasappa vs District Caste Verification Committee

High Court Of Karnataka|13 February, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.35194 OF 2016 (GM-CC) BETWEEN:
SMT.MANJULA W/O CHANNABASAPPA AGE: 40 YEARS, OCCUPATION: COUNCILOR TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL HUNASUR R/O K.R. NAGAR, HUNSUR. .… PETITIONER (By Mr. PRAVEEN KUMAR RAIKOTE, ADV. (ABSENT)) AND:
DISTRICT CASTE VERIFICATION COMMITTEE BY ITS SECRETARY SIDDARTHA LAYOUT NAZARBAD MYSORE – 27. … RESPONDENT (By Mr.C. JAGADEESH, SPL. COUNSEL) - - -
This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to call for records and allow this writ petition, quash the impugned notice issued by the respondent at Annexure-A Dtd.15.06.2016 and all further proceeding pursuant thereto and etc.
This Petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing in ‘B’ group this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER None for the petitioner.
Sri.C.Jagadeesh, learned Special counsel for the respondent.
2. In this petition, the petitioner inter alia has prayed for the following reliefs:
“(a) Issuing a writ of certiorari and quash the impugned notice issued by the respondent at Annexure-A dated 15th June 2016 vide No.JaNi/SakaE/D6/Ja Pra Pa/CR/16-17 and all further proceedings pursuant thereto;
(b) Any other writ, order or direction that this Hon’ble Court deems just in the circumstances of the matter.”
3. When the matter was taken up today, learned Special counsel for the respondent fairly submitted that the issue involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by an order dated 24.01.2019 passed by this Court in W.P.No.855/2019.
4. In view of the aforesaid submission and for the reasons assigned by this Court in the order dated 24.01.2019 passed in W.P.No.855/2019, the impugned order dated 15.06.2016 is hereby quashed and set aside.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
5. In view of the disposal of the writ petition, the pending interlocutory application does not survive for consideration and is accordingly disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE RV
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Smt Manjula W/O Channabasappa vs District Caste Verification Committee

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
13 February, 2019
Judges
  • Alok Aradhe