IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE L.NARAYANA SWAMY AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION No.36130/2019 (S-KSAT) Between:
Sri. K.Lakshmi Kantha Reddy, S/o late P.Jayarama Reddy, Aged about 58 years, Working as Assistant Director of Town Planning – South, Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike, N.R.Square, Bengaluru – 560 002. …Petitioner (By Sri. M.S.Bhagwat, Advocate) And :
1. The State of Karnataka, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Department of Public Works, Ports and Inland Water Transport, Vikasa Soudha, Bangalore – 560 001.
2. The State of Karnataka, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Department of Urban Development, Vikasa Soudha, Bangalore – 560 001.
3. The Commissioner, Bruhuth Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike, N.R.Square, Bangalore – 560 002.
4. The Deputy Commissioner (Administration), Bruhuth Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike, N.R.Square, Bangalore – 560 002. ...Respondents (By Smt. M.S.Prathima, AGA for R1 and R2) This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the impugned order dated 10.07.2019 passed by the Hon’ble Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore in Application No.4024/2019 in so far as rejection of interim prayer is concerned (Annexure – A) and consequently grant an interim order as prayed for by the petitioner in Application No.4024/2019 before the Hon’ble Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore and etc., This Writ Petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing this day, Narayana Swamy J, passed the following:
ORDER Against the order passed by the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal on 10.7.2019 in directing Addl. Govt. Advocate to take notice for Respondents 1 and 2 and Sri B.S. Goutham to take notice for Respondents 3 and 4 but stating that the interim relief would be considered after filing reply from the respondents, this writ petition is filed.
2. The learned AGA submitted that notice has been issued and it is observed in the impugned order that interim relief will be considered after filing reply from the respondents. Thereafter, the petitioner can seek interim relief.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for both the parties. It is seen from the impugned order dated 10.7.2019 that the Tribunal has observed that interim relief will be considered after reply from the respondents and has granted four weeks time to file objections. In case if the reply is not filed by the respondents within the time granted, we reserve liberty to the petitioner to move for interim relief. Liberty is also reserved to the petitioner to place all the materials in support of his case. In such an event, the Tribunal is directed to consider the interim prayer and pass appropriate order in accordance with law.
With these observations, the petition is disposed of.
SD/- JUDGE SD/- JUDGE Nm