IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION No.62924 OF 2016 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN:
SRI. PRABHAKAR POONJA SON OF NARASU L POONJA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, MANAGING DIRECTOR, M/S. HOTEL POOJA INTERNATIONAL, K.S. RAO ROAD, MANGALORE, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT-575 001. (BY SRI. S RAJASHEKAR, ADV.,) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA ... PETITIONER REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, TO GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001.
2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001.
3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT, MANGALORE-575 001.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VIJAY KUMAR.A.PATIL, AGA ) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DTD.25.11.2016 PASSED BY THE R-3 VIDE ANNEX-A AND DIRECT THE R-3 TO CONTINUE/ PROVIDE WITH THE GUNMEN PROVIDED BY THEM TO THE PETITIONER PURSUANT TO THE ORDER DTD.7.3.1996 PASSED BY THIS HONB'EL COURT IN WP.NO.1460/2004 VIDE ANNEX-B.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R Sri. S.Rajashekar, learned Counsel for the petitioner.
Sri. Vijaykumar A.Patil, learned Additional Government Advocate for Respondents.
The petition is admitted for hearing. With the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, the matter is heard finally.
2. In this writ petition, petitioner, inter alia, seeks the writ of certiorari to quash the order dated 25.11.2016 passed by Respondent No.3. Petitioner also seeks writ of mandamus directing the Respondent No.3 to provide Gunman which was provided to him in pursuance of the order dated 07.03.1996 passed by this Court in W.P.No.1640/1996 vide Annexure-B.
3. When the matter is taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after the impugned order dated 25.11.2016 was passed, the petitioner has submitted a representation vide Annexure-M and the writ petition may be disposed of with a direction to the Commissioner of Police, Mangalore, to decide the representation of the petitioner by a speaking order in accordance with law.
4. On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate submits that in case such a representation is submitted, the same will be considered after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
5. In view of the submissions made and in the facts of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the competent authority to consider and decide the representation submitted by the petitioner by a speaking order within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order passed today.
Sd/- JUDGE Srl.