Smt.Sumithra D Souza vs The State Of Karnataka on 17 March, 2009

._.-…… W… …,….,…m…… .w.=mm.u..nm nu.-m M.-mm ur-mxmmanm t-HIGH-1’C’Q{.’JRTOF xnmmmm” a-uGH’r:0umf’m’mmm’Am 2-ma-H

-4…

in fiisguta that tfie acminated
mambera af the Tribunals have
alragfiy :a5i§&ed, fifintinuing
the Tribunals aithaut full

qaarum ia mat permissible in:
law. ?herefsre, the mnly 1

aptisa is ta fliract the fitate
to zefiansiituta tfie ?ribuhaEg
in accardaace with
é§{3)

Sacti@fix»
af tha Karnataka Laafi.

aeform Act, 1%: wmi»—r.:h :3h.«.’i.’:;’3.–.
be 563% within 45 flay? £r¢§. ~

the date af reseigt §f’a*cqg§
The ‘»§ritu

af thia sides.

Eatitian is dispfigad/¢f’$ith x

the above dira¢tign.”§

§. :5 the ligfi;’$§”fi§§_c:fi§f’§fi$se€ in the

ab9ve writ get£:i:n, “i:ié< yeiifiian £3 alas

dispesefi af gith aA5imi1ar fiiraétiéfi in tgrms mf

thé orfiar §as3a§'i§ ¥rii_E§iitian Ka.2?§4fGe {GM~

?1CL},. izgsgma '.2:;.V"§:5é.2{:s9,.. Eartiaa ta

maintain 3§ata$~§m§;u"V

85$'

Sd/-

Iudge

figcaréingigg éifigg yrit; Pétitiafi fig dispased