High Court Karnataka High Court

Prashant S Makkalageri vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited on 2 March, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Prashant S Makkalageri vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited on 2 March, 2009
Author: Mohan Shantanagoudar
 -  

Wt'? ¥'~3fi.658% 0:' EEESS

,1'
..E..

IN "WEE HIGH COUR? GF %G¥.RNATAKA
CIRCUET BENCH AT DHARWE-Xfi

wires) 'ms THE 2"' {JAY as MARCH 2Q.€3._9 ' 

BEFORE

Ti-§E HQWBLE Ma.3us'a"IcE M0Hm}"$e¢A§~:'rAzs;,¥x§:i3,g;ws§z 

wan' PETETIO¥'«£ ssse.'55se,L/:.2%;_e£j:%ST'i's-§;Er:§3-. 1 " 
BETWEEN: V}  %% T' 

Prashant S.Makkaiager§;- _ .. - _ -- 
S/0 Satappa, Age: 35 yeaks,  , . ,' " '
OX6 mvisionaé Engineer, H    _ 
S,D.E. {Battery &V_Power,P.£a_n.i;)   "
Ranebennur, _ . _   V    ' 

Dharwaé Te§e€jomj;iiTD§$.tri'ct.{_      MPETITIQNER

(By Srfi.  é\¥3§§ Kaie, Adva)

 §§3Va':at Sva1'r*sc"'§:'.a;§a7r' fxiégam Limited,
L-Rep; b'y*v.s3t=;rieraE\..?~1anager Temccm,

D'E1.a$rwaé '"Fés3g=.»¢T9m District, -
§""§t.,i3:':r§.£'__-=2Q_».' ' .V  ...RES?C}NDENT

 {sagsr§.%¥'3-§aréprasad, cc-25¢)

M  "%"h§s writ §etE%§9:": is féieé améar Articées 22$ am 22?

 _,+:_>f§ the Constétzztmn of India praying to éecéare that the
  Eetterfwmmufiicatien dateé 18,02.28§8, mcézscaafi as $8?'
' * Anzzexure-3 as §Eiaga¥ am quash the sarzaa



WP No.§S8C* of 2008

This writ petition ccming on for preiimmary hearing
in 'B' Group this day, the Court made the !"oi§owing: ._ 
O R D E R   

The endorsement/order Vida Arane.;§{i’;*g-3j’_=.déi9e:;§.. V’

18.92.2008, issued by the resposjiziérét”ts:-«.$:%z->2;

directing the petfitioner ts s.urrenii§2r ‘–the §’:*.i_;_:Ai’A’:2’ai”

certificate to the issuing auth6’r{fy.for.g’e§££:’sg: .=§téV'”c§’%1V§:é%!ed
and, further, for traatirig._A_the” bétEVfi:§?§vér_as éémiéig under

other backward class comn§:3Vn5t*yL’ n

Th’ouvg l’?:*’fft.i§’e» V”‘Vr:x’L§}§:€fts:ff:ent at Annexure~J dated

18.02.20£’3787»i$” in f’he’4Vs2’ata§fe of a iettar or an endorsement,

is v§n5rEu–a§§.Y__’a¥T order directing the petétiener ta

sigrr-9::jd.e_r«.V§1«§.sV””*»s;rEgEnaS caste certificate. “She said ewe?

§:’a>»§§u;:§’ééVé’s..t’:§é{ the petitioner was not come w%thEn the

g Sch飧:;§7e9c§ “f’}iba category. Na enquiry, in whatsoever

gz:”£’a’:**:z’:§er, “%s maid against the aetitianer befere isazing téae

é:’€:fi éféement;’erder Vfiéfi A:3:’2e::o_sf-:*l;,””i i”:e”‘«

enéorsement ciated 18.02.2098, vAé’c’§ae»:’z5g§1ne)§i»£;_r_;=3f’3v, ‘~isnsf=;;s’ed

by the respondent cannot be”s.§s~tainéd’*–afidTfhéfiéfiké is

fiable to be quashed. Act;:;Vrdin:;V§§?’,’ii’isu§u_ashéé’.V”‘

Writ petitionis ai£gsa;és..1;:’~ Vv A
Sé/**:

!<ms*