IN THE HIGH coum or KARNATAKA AT 8ANuStA§;€3§E¢ wcreo was THE :9" saw or I % * THE HON'BLE MR.JU5TICE % WRIT Enrgom BETWEEN: Shanthi Edacafioa as (Rfi . " on State Running a;.-achoé1V.und;r._énamc._" V And styleiof J ' Mothc;ffi'h¢ru§:éia1§53g;1_;g;g_1" _ " " chikkabam; " pm Rcp.by.its._Scc'xetaty, T' . S/o.}atc 44. . _ V .. PETITIONER 'A Adv.,) Statcfof Kamataka .. FEep.by its Primary 8» Higher Education ' M..S.BmB' mg' Dr.An:xbedkar Road Bangalore -2- 2. The Deputy Dimctor of Public Instxucfinns, Dept. of Public Education Chikkaballapur Dist. Chikkaballapur .. RESPONDENTS
(By Sri B.Manohar, AGA)
This writ petition is fijogafiggicxfl Artieiee_:Q26:Fand 227 of
the Constitution of .§i1.:1_ia, ggxraying “the impugned
memorandum dated “.1..f;.-:.2008:.j_vic1e_ A,11J1e.xt11’e~B, issued by
R2,ctc. . *
This wzzifijpefitien fhczi-j’pv1’ehm1na1y’ ‘ beam’ g
B-Group, time “(Joint made fl2e”folk)wing:-
ffenneR
this’ “”.petitioner has questioned the
crgier _at ‘4 dated 1.2.2008, whereby the
granted. to the petitioner to start an
“‘ ._ (*€é”i_ji§A(:”£:fii:>Ifl1_:’&:_i::’iT1iStit11I2’£GIl has been withdrawn.
” Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
contended that the petitioner has filed
‘ ‘fdetailed objections to the ShOW-08.1188 notice issued by
\/S
-3-
the second respondent It is further contended the
second respondent without considering the
and without application of mind has 4_
styled order. In this mg’, ‘ j
decisions of this Court in ‘the ¢ ‘3s” H, fi¢ ‘V
…. M % N ,. ,,,._ ,,.a .,.
1978(1) KLJ 473 us. The
Commissioner, Authority &
‘A appearing on
justifies the impugned order.
, ‘V 3. A of the impugwd order shows that the
has passed a cyclo-styied order
%%~;iri:1:oi1£L%V%%ap§1y1ngk his mind. This Court in Sauna
Case and Vtvelcanad V.P.’s Case (supra)
» fieplecatcd the practice of passing cycle-styled
£)»I”(i€’:I’S by the quasi-judicial authorities without
\/X
. 4.
application of mind. Thus, the order is
arbitrary in nature and £5 liable to be quashe.r.!{ ‘ A.
4. It is to be noted here that the
had passed a (ikrvemment
dated 29.4.1994 laying dowp the’
followed by the primary State of
Karnataka and the adopted
at the prim’ Court in the
case of of Primary and
as. The State of
‘ Department of
1m 2008 mm 2395
. V, , validity of the said Government
the offending clauses 2, 3, 6 and 8
efthe Order.
” I In the result, the Writ petition suwds and it is
eceoxdmgly .. allowed in pmt. The erder at
%.
‘\/A)
-5-
Anncxure-B, dated 1.2.2008, passed by the:
respondent-DDPS stands quashed. Matter is
the second respondent for K ” 2
with law and in the light of the .
Court.