IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NOS.2997-3000 OF 2019 (GM-TEN) BETWEEN:
SUDHAKARA SHETTY S/O. SUNDARA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS PROPRIETOR TRUPTHI JUICE, FAST FOOD & CATERING RESIDING AT NO.GL 5/36 5TH BLOCK, KRISHNAPURA KATIPALLA POST MANGALORE, D.K.-575 030. …PETITIONER (BY SRI RAJESWARA P.N., ADV.) AND:
1. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY KARNATAKA, SURATHKAL, SRINIVASNAGAR POST MANGALORE-575 025 DAKSHINA KANNADA REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR.
2. THE REGISTRAR NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY KARNATAKA, SURATHKAL, HOSTELS TRUST SRINIVASNAGAR POST MANGALORE-575 025 DAKSHINA KANNADA.
3. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY KARNATAKA SURATHKAL, HOSTELS TRUST SRINIVASNAGAR POST MANGALORE-575 025. DAKSHINA KANNADA REPRESENTED BY PROFESSOR IN-CHARGE HOSTEL AFFAIRS. …RESPONDENTS THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE LETTER DATED 26.09.2018 ISSUED BY THE R-3 (ANNEXURE-A), QUASH THE COMMUNICATION DATED: 22.09.2018 ISSUED BY THE R-2 TO THE R-3 AT ANNEXURE-B AND ETC.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Sri Rajeswara P.N., learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner on the question of admission.
3. In these petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks a writ of certiorari to quash the letter dated 26.09.2018 issued by the respondent No.3, by which the decision to award the contract in favour of the petitioner to run the night canteen for VIII Hostel Block has been cancelled by respondent No.3.
4. After arguing the matter to some extent, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he be granted the liberty to submit a representation with regard to his grievance to respondent No.1 and the said authority to direct the respondent No.2 to decide the representation submitted by the petitioner by a speaking order in accordance with law.
5. In view of the aforesaid submission and in the facts of the case, the writ petitions are disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.1 that in case the representation submitted by the petitioner is still pending, the respondent No.2 shall decide the same by a speaking order in accordance with law, after providing opportunity to all the concerned parties within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today. It is made clear that, no opinion is expressed by this Court on the merits of the case.
Accordingly, the writ petitions are disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE ST