IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11th DAY OF MARCH 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.44635 OF 2018 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
SRI SAI CHARAN CONSTRUCTIONS REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR G CHANDRASHEKHAR S/O RAMANJANEYALU AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.141 CHANDRAPPA ROAD M S PALYA BANGALORE-560008.
(By MR. J C KUMAR, ADV.) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS SECRETARY HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT M S BUILDING BANGALORE-560001.
2. THE REGISTRAR BANGALORE UNIVERSITY JNANA BHARATHI CAMPUS BANGALORE-560059.
3. THE UNIVERSITY ENGINEERING BANGALORE UNIVERSITY JNANA BHARATHI CAMPUS BANGALORE-560059.
(By MR. Y D HARSHA, AGA FOR R1 … PETITIONER … RESPONDENTS MR. T P RAJENDRAKUMAR SUNGAY, ADV. FOR R2 R3 – SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED ) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-2 AND 3 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATIONS OF THE PETITIONER DTD:16.6.2017, 24.10.2017 AND 7.8.2018 AS PER ANNEXURE-A TO C AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Sri.J.C.Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Sri.Y.D.Harsha, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.1 and Sri.T.P.Rajendrakumar Sungay, learned counsel for respondent No.2.
2. The petition is admitted for hearing. With consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the same is heard finally.
3. In this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has inter alia prayed for the following reliefs:
a) Issue writ of mandamus or any other appropriate order with a direction to the Respondents No.2 and 3 to consider the representations of the petitioner dated 16.06.2017, 24.10.2017 and 07.08.2018 as per Annexures-A to C; and b) Grant such other or further relief/s as this Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity.
4. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the writ petition be disposed of with a direction to Respondent Nos.2 and 3 to consider the representations submitted by the petitioner dated 16.06.2017, 24.10.2017 and 07.08.2018.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 submits that on the basis of the averments contained in the aforesaid writ petition, the representations submitted by the petitioner will be considered.
6. In view of submissions made and in the facts and circumstances of the case, Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to Respondents No.2 and 3 to consider the representations submitted by the petitioner dated 16.06.2017, 24.10.2017 and 07.08.2018 by passing a speaking order within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed by this Court.
It is made clear that this court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
Sd/- JUDGE BNV