IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU ON THE 10TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ WRIT APPEAL NO.1632 OF 2014 [LB-RES] BETWEEN:
SRI. A.N.RAJU, SON OF A.S.NINGEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, RESIDING AT ANKANAHALLI VILLAGE, SALIGRAMA HOBLI, K.R.NAGAR TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT-570 009.
... APPELLANT [BY SRI. SRINIVAS V., ADVOCATE] AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS UNDER SECRETARY, URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, VIKASA SOUDHA, KARNATAKA GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. THE COMMISSIONER, THE MYSURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY [MUDA], J.L.B. ROAD, MYSURU. ... RESPONDENTS [BY SMT. SHWETA KRISHNAPPA, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR R-1;
SRI. T.P.VIVEKANANDA, ADVOCATE FOR R-2] THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WRIT PETITION NO.234 OF 2013 [LB-RES], DATED 5.8.2013.
****** THIS WRIT APPEAL COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY RAVI MALIMATH, J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT The learned counsel for the appellant contends that in identical circumstance, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of NIRMALA S.R. VERSUS MYSORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY in CIVIL APPEAL NO.7048 OF 2016 and other connected cases, granted liberty to the appellant therein to urge all factual and legal contentions available in law before the revisional authority, which shall be considered on merits in accordance with law. Hence, he pleaded that he may be granted benefit of the said order.
2. The same is not disputed by the respondents’ counsel.
3. Under these circumstances, the writ appeal is disposed off in terms of the aforesaid order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
Sd/- Sd/-
JUDGE JUDGE Ksm*