IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.44117 OF 2016 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
SRI BALDEEP KUMAR G. S/O LATE GABRIEL AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS R/AT NO.241, ULLASAPPA ROAD KAMMANAHALLI, ST.THOMAS TOWN POST BENGALURU-560 056 … PETITIONER (BY SRI.G.S.VENKAT SUBBARAO, ADV.) AND:
THE BANGALORE CITY CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., H.O. PAMPAMAHAKAVI ROAD CHAMARAJPET BENGALURU-560 018 REP. BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER … RESPONDENT (BY SMT.H.R.UMADEVI, ADV.) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT RESPONDENT TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED:16.07.2016 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER UNDER ANNEXURE-C AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Sri. G.S. Venkat Subbarao, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Smt. H.R. Umadevi, learned counsel for the respondent.
The petition is admitted for hearing. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the same is heard finally.
2. In this petition, the petitioner inter alia seeks for a direction to the respondent to consider the representation dated 16.07.2016 submitted by the petitioner under Annexure-C.
3. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the writ petition may be disposed of with a direction to the respondent to consider the representation dated 16.07.2016 submitted by the petitioner in accordance with law.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the representation submitted by the petitioner shall be dealt with in accordance with law, if not already decided.
5. In view of the submissions made and in the facts of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction that the competent authority shall decide the representation submitted by the petitioner, if not already decided, in accordance with law by a speaking order within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today.
6. With regard to other reliefs, which have been claimed by the petitioner, he shall be at liberty to take recourse to such remedy as may be available to him under law.
7. Till the representation filed by the petitioner is decided by the competent authority, ad-interim order dated 03.10.2016 granted by a bench of this Court, shall continue provided the petitioner has complied with the conditions prescribed in the order.
8. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the case.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE dn/-