High Court Karnataka High Court

Bharathi Vidyasamshte vs The Principal Secretary on 11 August, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Bharathi Vidyasamshte vs The Principal Secretary on 11 August, 2009
Author: Anand Byrareddy


mmmz cw mmwamm mm-I 5mm? 0? KARNATAKA Him-I «:0;

Q? %.$W£NfliAKfls M1631 EJQUKI Q?’ Kflflfijfilflafifl. HEWM £§€;§%.§%E Q? QQRKNAIQMM M§€>’,;é%’7′

‘1
IN nmnzm comm cg? mmmaxa AT BANGALQRE
nwrm THPSTHE 11″‘ my OF AUGUST ms

BEE

THE Hm~raLEMa..JUsrIcE mum

Byitssecrctmy 1 N%%:%%%A&kpET1noNER

Spm$CEfinKu:
Em4hfiwmflyCdkwm
Shmflwmmmmmg
&MmmmpaeTd§h

Efifififlfii

(fiyfimifiwflmfimfiihmmmfi,
ifllffiil

This Wm Petition is filed {:3
the Constiiufxonef a
no.1 to ccmm rclicf
filedby Ap§im1N¢.2:*:2;ue9 without

day. the %

‘ rchcf’ 9ong,htfm’byl:l1cpw.1mwr”
:@poal*’ %T before the Appcnam Authomy’ , on

§
2
E
§
9-:

Q
5*-

an
3
0

-13
%E
‘E
§
§
.2

-a:

§
3
“E
Q
m
3
:5
2

-x
§
33;

:9
‘a
_Q
%z
3
3% ._
33 V’
3%’
§§*~
Eziéf-z
Efi
fiw

‘ ‘ mepwm mam ‘ as
wmrmnwnhnbazysomapamoamcwomhthiscamt,

@

Komumsuaa RE§~oNDE§rrs%k[%Vy%%%k%L% h

intheeven1thattheAp#1Authority fdlstocomiderthe
ixatcritnraliaferpmordancwuyaanhcctlter.
sd/-§_’
Xudge

4%.} $3.2 éfinégxg .53 3.553 SEE fizfimfifigfié E2. gfinafi igémfifixfii Ea mxfifig §_§§ §E$§§ mfi $539 £@§ fiwfiwfigmfifi gfi