IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO. 19110 OF 2018 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
1. SRI. T. KARIBASAPPA S/O LATE BASVALINGAPPA CHATTANAHALLI VILLAGE HONNALI TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT ALSO AT VEERABHADRESHWARA NILAYA 3RD CROSS, BASAVESHWARANAGARA SHIMOGA – 577 201.
2. SRI. M. RANGAPPA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS S/O LATE BASAPPA PALAVANAHALLI, HONNALI TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT.
3. S. HALLAPPA S/O LATE CHANNAPPA AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS R/AT SURUVANNI HONNALI TALUK DAVANGERE.
4. SRI. T. GURUBASAPPA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS S/O LATE BASVALINGAPPA GANJENAHALLI HONNALI TALUK DAVANGERE DISTRICT.
5. SMT. RATHNAMMA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS D/O LATE T. CHANNABASAPPA CHATTNAHALLI, HONNALI TALUK DAVANGERE DISTRICT.
6. SRI. SHEKARAPPA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS S/O LATE RANGAPPAGOWDA CHELURU, KADADAKATTE HONNALI TALUK DAVANGERE DISTRICT.
7. SRI. B. MUKUNDAPPA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS S/O LATE GIRIYAPPA D NO 8, SW 1ST CROSS, KALLAHALLI, VINOBANAGARA ANJANEYA ROAD, SHIMOGA.
8. SMT. PADMAMMA AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS W/O HALESHAPPA KALLAHALLI HUDCO COLONY NO 30, SHIMOGA.
(BY SRI. B. N. JAYADEVA , ADVOCATE) AND :
... PETITIONERS 1. THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU – 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SHIMOGA DISTRICT SHIMOGA.
3. THE TAHSILDAR SHIMOGA TALUK SHIMOGA.
(BY SMT.PRAMILA HONNAPURA, AGA) ... RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATIONS OF THE PETITIONERS AS DIRECTED BY THE CHIEF MINISTER, IN HIS COMMUNICATION DATED 20.10.2016 VIDE ANNEXURE-B.
- - -
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Sri. B. N. Jayadeva, learned counsel for the petitioners.
Smt. Prathima Honnapur, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents.
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 petitioners inter alia seeks for a direction to the respondents to consider the representations submitted by the petitioners at Annexure-B.
3. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the writ petition may be disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 to consider the representations submitted by the petitioners in accordance with law.
4. On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents submitted that the representations submitted by the petitioners 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, subject to payment of deficit *court fee within a period of three weeks, with a direction to respondent No.2 to consider and decide the representations submitted by the petitioners at Annexure-B by a speaking order, if not already decided, in accordance with law within a period * Corrected vide Chambers Order dated 26-7-2019 of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today.
6. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the case.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE SA