IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12th DAY OF APRIL 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.18362 OF 2014 (GM-KLA) BETWEEN:
Sri.B.K.Sundar, Age: 65 years, S/o.Sri.Kunjappa Pujari, R/at No.120, 4th Main, 12th Cross, Vidyaranyapuram, Kille Mohalla, Mysuru, Presently residing at Sudagalli village, Shanivarasanthe Hobli, Somawarapete Taluk, Kodagu District. … PETITIONER (By Mr.K.Sreedhar, Advocate) AND:
1. State of Karnataka, Rep. by its Secretary, Revenue Department, M.S.Building, Bengaluru.
2. Karnataka Lokayukta, Represented by its Registrar, M.S.Building, Bengaluru-560 001.
3. The Superintendent of Police, Lokayukta Police, Madikeri, Kodagu District.
4. The Sub-Registrar, Mysuru East, Mysuru.
… RESPONDENTS (By Mr.V.Shivareddy, High Court Government Pleader for R-1 and 4, Sri.B.S.Prasad, Advocate for Sri.Venkatesh D.Dalwai, Advocate for R-2 and 3) This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to prohibit the Lokayukta and its offices from investigating any matter relating to confirmation deed dated 7.12.2013 as the authorities under the Lokayukta Act do not have any power to investigate the matter.
This Petition coming on for preliminary hearing in ‘B’ Group, this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER None for the petitioner even when the matter is taken at 3.45 p.m.
2. The petition is admitted for hearing. With consent of the learned counsels for the parties, the same is heard finally.
3. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner inter alia has prayed for the following reliefs:
“(a) Issue a writ of prohibition prohibiting the Lokayukta and its officers from investigating any matter relating to confirmation deed dated 7.12.2013 as the authorities under the Lokayukta Act do not have any power to investigate the matter; and (b) Pass such other order or orders as this Court deems fit and necessary in the circumstances of the case.”
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner neither furnished crime number nor case number and in case petitioner furnishes the crime number or the case number, the respondents shall appraise the petitioner with regard to the status of the investigation.
5. In view of the aforesaid submission, the Writ Petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to furnish the case number or the crime number to the Investigating Officer.
6. Needless to state that in case aforesaid particulars are furnished, the respondents shall appraise the petitioner with regard to the status of the investigation as prayed for by him.
Accordingly, the Petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE BNV