High Court Karnataka High Court

Smt Sakamma vs The Bangalore Development … on 16 April, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Smt Sakamma vs The Bangalore Development … on 16 April, 2009
Author: K.Sreedhar Rao Gowda
BE'5{'WEEl«N:»

1.

.45.’-.:

IN ‘E’HE; HIGH COURT’ GP’ KARNATAKA AT’ BANGAL;::RfE_T’-V–,,

DATED THZS THE 16?” my 014′ APRIL, 23:59″ if “‘

PRESENT __m_

THE Hc:~:m1,E MR. aiégrgcts §{:.4sR;§:E§)I§:%,§2AA}§;m” T’=.._ A’

Ami?

THE i~£0§~:**BL13. MR. JUSTECE: 3:’;’~;’:'{RE1gNivAS$’ §C}’§§€DA
€,c:.c.N~<:$';:* 43 ,'%'2Qf;;s§{i:1'*¢.'t§;; _

SMT.

w/0 ‘
AGEZQ A_BGi;}”gV37″‘{‘I:”3fi;E~’%.’g%7J%,¢_ ”

N0’..,59:,r:,.24u;:R_, 7
EANGALQREV .–. ;23;=.

I»;1§£SHNA§éIj’R*mY,

~ 310.. TIRGMALAIAH,

;a§;éi::.2f;3? 4’i.1:*’£{)°i;}’I’ 53 YEARS,

“-T’:-:.<:»"'3£3_!'?.2,–'9?H MAW ROAD,

A ' VIJAYF:P§_fi~.GAR,
"~Bm.%'GA,:.»sar2:E -« at}.

s§§mz"ANNA,
"3; <3 SI[}£)3'~S.P?A,

* msar} ABCIUT' 4? YEARS,

R/AT' Ni}, 388f?'i2,
9TH MAIE, VIJAYA?\¥AGAR,
BANGRLQRE — 40.

BHAGYAMMA,

we RAJANNA,

AGED AEOUT’ 36 YEARS,

RM; 3%, 1.3′? MAIN, SAMPIGE LAYGUT’
VIJAYANAGAR, BAl’~E’GALORE 40.

B. LAi{,SHMi,
WfO 7*. ASWATH,

f&G,E’;1} ABGUT 38 YEARS,

RIA. B. NAGASANDRA,

NO. .10, BWSSB QUARTERS,

HAL P033′, I
BANGALGRE M9 1.

S. GQWRAMMA, _
W/’0. P. sH:vAMURTm’, ‘
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
NO Ms,/3, 18’? «mass,
HQSAHALLI, 0
VIJAYANGAR, V – _
BANGALCJRE » 49. V . ‘

NANJAPPA, 4 _: _’–

5/0 LATE I§E_VEGf)WEiE%., 1
AGED__fi1B’QU’1″~;§_,9 VY’§;ARs, *
R/5;; N(};–9fl{)[15′;} ‘
BHA_I;=E’, » 40.

:{.§§z;A§HUs§-my RAG,
S/c»..,._:;A’I’E :2-RANESH rear),

” ‘?1g’G 540.341, 3? 13’ 522033,
* ._3.F?:D BLOCK,

RAJAJ fi”EAGAFi,

E BANGALORE:-560916.

8.6, WJAYAMBIKA,
W/O. <3, CHANNABASAVARADYA,
AGED! A805'? 45 YEARS,
CEEIKKANAHALLE,

RAMASANDRA DHAKALE-,
BA§~éGALc::RE saum TALUK.

FSNDH

THE: BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT Az3T:~£~;s.:aH. _ ”

_ ._ “A<::cI_:S.i:r3' 1
(BY SR: K. KRESHNA, A:31..rG<:A'i'I::)'~~V..V '- V V.
THIS c:~::.c FILED 1}/S. 11…&_,"'1_2"–.QF' '§'HE:.,{§{}}'iTErvIPi'
0? COURT AC'? PRA_.¥~~:NG_«" T15 .}?~EI'§"1ATE CQNTEMPT
PROCEEDINGS Aaamzew – ; 'RLESPGEDENT mg
DISOBEYING ORDER I_§'If-r;.',:0,s'3;.;é_c;a$..__:.PAs$E§ IN
W.P.NC).1835/12003 AND,"};'83*?T]0&5.._"-._ V

This c,.é.,C.§f"'i.s .c;@'i§g . £;§;}"""§xders this day,
SREEDHAR ';nad't{'.t11%: .fQ1.1oV§ing:

VIA Q:"%* Qgmfim" ''''
Th a=:_ 1ea4'z~méa"__'B'3a has submitted that file

1'1EC€SS8.I'};' 51:i§=: r£s EV1'aVe7}a'€:ex_1;:' passed fer aliotting alternative

sites.~.§§;:; V the "con;;1:;122inants axcapt c:ompIai;t1a12t No.14

"._Vbe§:a.u sc:, :fIa.¢*.\:# Z;2;i1_n of complainant No.14 has been rejected.

if'.;i;.§….$«'"E1B3.,{fi'§E'E§:(f:§:;.that in' View of the general elections for

V _ parliégzacaig want of staff 1:116: necessary a}10"a:'£1ez1t letters

H " .,.fia*rr:%_;1c:t ¥§c:en issueefi anai that the allatment letters Wauid be

-_iss1i’4::f sometime immediately affgr the general elecfions. in

‘ View of Elm submissign, the cempiaint is ciosed.

Q

Sd/~
Tudge

Sd/-3:’
Judge