A N Kanthareddy vs The Managing Director on 15 April, 2009

=;.%=:_m%§A’¥”fl.%A HIGH Cfi

$3
Q
$09
K
3
§
Q
3
§
3
§
3
Z
3
§
line
3
P’
K
3
3
Q
3
E
3
§
5
Q
E
%
5
3-

3

Q
3
3
J
x
E
2
§
§
%

unwnx

wwwww wt W-(‘V-%&W#”*am’1″fi&”fiu#% Hflwfi Emkfikfifli WW

with

is was KIGB case! as :aanaraxa.yr naxazfigm

BATE? @313 ?HE :3″ may 0? ayazn, 2@§3 f ‘,

EEE’*§§’.E

THE aaxigag ER,3§5E::E;S,駧§3 m§z$ag. “;_

wax? §E€:?zafiT§§.s522 QEAEQQE

Efifififi.

533%:

E’ A x KAgTHa3m§¥~T-“_ _,
35¢ A REREYAEREBEE f”
&§EB 52 ygAR€:*”*.f ,z_ .’_.
Rffi J Q”R3§XT§§wE%§ ” “»’«W;
fig’? <:3.<:z:=ss 4'
$H:Taan§'§a *»4*§«'

2 G a§$%%R?fi§'§§£§ _
8§G–La?E"§fi§&Efi5§§A
gags 62 ?ER&§"_ 4»
gay: ":i*~34fI£"~";;SI'§'Z'*;ii."'3§;.SL€':-. 2;?.I;'_" L_E:.f§'§'§
Efififi § ; €;@§E:$E

4,: 3 E§§RR~£HREL&§ER3

$fi$"LATEE3a§§£§§§§a
gags 61 Eggggg"

~.Rg@ Evsgaflaagfizaa

3" %afi;y3""$aQ55

' fgw$¥VEM?¥E%§&R, Tfififififi 2

<?§?§3%§LL§ZA§
, .§£$ LETS ganmaxa
*§EE§ 53 EEA35
».u =E£é'vIB2ARasARa
' » '!:~.'eE.%.E: Jfi.-3'I§i$£I"}."'E

EIRA, 'E'°i}¥%R . . u PETITEQEQEES

_$¢ aaa§§.*

cf thia writ getitiafi in tgrms mi th§'$éifi

decisian.

2» In the Eight sf thg s§h§i$§i§n $f_th§

learnafi Gaunssl f9::_ tfieA =§a:ti@a;’ 1m

rggpandsnt is dixe&tad 2fic tréafi” thé: writ
getitian as zepr3s§a:at§Qfi*af,%be peéitiwnfixs
anfi &i2§a3a af the .5é$§f in igfims af tha

afcraaaifi fiefijfiiéfi, mf7 §§i5 ~£fiu:: within a

periafi af_%$&aé waiE§§”t;mé Exam tag fiata sf
receiyt ¢f*$ c&fi§ gfféhia §rdez.

$31: §$gi:;¢m4:a’§ia§s$efi mi xsézfiingiy,
Sell-

Judge

.. ‘VH9’-‘W|I”N’flI’m|D ….. rawmmswwanéwflwm nlwn tiwmgmx W3″ m«a.;m:~«:;Mam%m 1-«mew EUUW OF E%§fiW’~iA’fM(A MESH COURT OF Kfi.RNA3″flKA Hifii-K mum W?’ mmxmm iffififl fie’