High Court Karnataka High Court

The Sub-Divisional Engineer vs The Registration And Regional on 21 April, 2009

Karnataka High Court
The Sub-Divisional Engineer vs The Registration And Regional on 21 April, 2009
Author: Ajit J Gunjal
IN THE HIGH coum' op' KARNATAKA ~_'   VT
CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD _ 
DATED THIS THE 2132 DAY 91? APRI.L"'£:O§§   
BEFORE   ' "  V

THE HONBLE MR.Ju,s:mcE AJI_'I"'.;I.GUl§I:;I;*.§.1.',.  "

 

WRIT PETITION  

EETWEEN:

THE SUB-DIVISIONAL ENG:NE;:~:R,_,  

MICROWAVE MAINTENANCE"  , V' 

$1:-zsz, EISTRICTUTTAR KANMIJA,' .  »

BHARATH sANc:v1~I;-xzziirarezam LH¥i'ITE»D.'  V. 
      ....PE'£'ITIONER

(BY SR1. s.M;RAg:"END;za,Ar;v.}"--._ , ' 

-5-'5-Di _ .  . .  .
THE R1s:c§;is'f:22A*i'2'o:~1'z5;1~:'1_§'REGJGNAL
'FRANSPOR'F%OFFIC'E-R E:NDVA.'JTHORI'I'Y
smsr, DISTRICT U'i'}'Af2 KANNAIJA.

5' " _  ._ ' ...RESPONDEN'I'

' .  4133""-:«=;1§)I'f'7\g':aj§2aVA1': V15-ice?)

 V  "13-ji_i3_I1"{*'I'i'E'_I'I;ON IS FILEE) UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE C{}_£'i_3I',?I'l}'TION OF' INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
ORDER DATEfI"I7.?.2008 ON THE FILE OF' THE RESPONDENT

PRQIEUCED ‘!§T ANNEX¥..IR’E~L SO FAR AS FT RELATES T0

§.’ESER’i!!N$ ITS FSTGHT TO REOPEN THE CASE AND ETC.

V. A’ .frI~;1é Pm’r:oN coming on FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
T =*:iHz.s_ gm, ‘THE comm’ MADE THE F’OLLOW§NG:

9–3—-P.-113 _ V .

The petitioner claims to be;’;t}ie’e*.§ér§er
in questiofi. It appears the teld L’
and was not 3. working to V’
the notification of pzfblie veéliieleew/Ens sold
and was purchased This fact was
intimated to certificate
and tax ‘to the Oifice of the
such surrender, the
show cause notice calling

upen the ‘-tespay the tax. The same was

” –sub_:}eet5»-.in.atter of m petition. This Court allowed the

renaitted the matter to the authorities

eoi1t*3¢1’Hf4’d..VL’It appears, after remand, the respondent

has issued a comm1micat:ien-a copy of which is

* .épfods£eed at Annexure 1:, which is impugned in this

% j’_ ‘ V» W-fit petition. ,. fl

5. Hence, I am of the View that the quesfierx-._ef

entertaining this writ petitien does not

reserved to the petitioner to questionéthe’ it ie ‘A ”

raised at 3 later point of time.
Petition stands rejecteri–.–~~ _
Smt. V’PE.eVé1’der is permitted

to file memo of weeks. ‘

salu-