HEGH COLE!!!' OF KAWAYAKA HIGH COURY OF KAWMAKA HiۤH 1
-1-
m TIE I-3G1-i scum' or Kamwraxm, BANGA1.C_3RE: _V'~w. %
DATED THIS THE 23" war or sewremseiéztifaaa
3EFORE
me: AGRI€:ULTUR1arr~»V%'% t "
R§(}...«BELL&lEF:%I.Li*'--.. '
%«
EJDUAPI'*tfiLUTEfisl§1}. %
smmxc? ~ 576 1.13
% PETITIONER
__(5y =AsHk:aF.%:V%Hai'RAmam.L1, ADV. 1203 ms
A3r;nmIsmrea;:1nLL1*rs'nssrs.)
amraor EARIWMKA
- »uIu'unna"I| re Ifl'Wm">I at ur RHEIVIKIIWRA
x kmrmsmcnmawmwerzmnm
_ mmrzrnmm
'i':£{*.%B. Burmnia
E vmmm VEEDHI
nma%na new
mxauoxm .. saoom.
Q THE $331' HEG OF
§:$--O?EK§TIVE 3a _
mmamm nmsrox V
mnrmwm,
mum nmmcr.
. man»-
.3...
Prafiant 1351' the period of 2%': years from V
auflwead a loss no 9; mm: of V'
non-mm-y efoummnwma ban
rwm For the financial
. unwmt - Mygmu war nmmwznanna ram.-Mt"! LUUKI OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNAYAKR HEGH I
racluced in RsJ5,3'7',3£}8f-. The
1-+-was m 32.3.2005 was
Deparunmfl. Auditxar who
" the mluafinn of
apam by mung and
aha bumm expanses at as per
Amzuwe-F. The ;hr:: signfi and
attgsaati «Van well as otlnr
of respondent No.3
is g: }%%k;m~%T H. The petitioner was
11.52am and 30.52%
making frimkms allegations
had eomitrbed an tmence
» 29¢: (8) ch: cf the Km-nataka cmpa-au’ue
Saciaafies Act. The: peminrmr has aubmtmd 11% reply
amwzmzt firm the datnih, they are at
-“-”'”=”-” ‘–v-‘ -uvvsu Ur nmauwnsnflu Hiufi LUURI Oi’ KARNATAKA HIGH COUF
-4-
am 5.». Without holding an enqu1’1’y. without
:app::.*rtu.Ifi.t3′ 12:: the petfisner tan M
mmafixssng the impugrmd ”
chaliengfng the afcurwaid 01%;:-….’?’n .
nm: 3 urder, I33 befome
such an cercier was Sectxion
2% gay 31:} cf the mum not
served. The learned
scrum-e1 submit that agaimt the
“a:.§_t:3::11tory agl fies and th%re,
aims: maitxtainable.
4″-ii»; hard the learned Counsel appearing for
. 1. I
53» Itiatruaafifimttizesaid oz:-elm-, analhm-natisaa
remedy csf appeal Hes. But. what made the Court in
exfififix tin writ petzifitm was the allwfion that if the\\’//
i
Ki!” RMKHVHIMKN |”I¥\.:fl’l R..|.)&.H
-5…
g¢:r’s»em in the marxagmumt; have not
afihim af the society in a proper
mu:-was cf firm Managng Cammittzce are ‘
the mm. The pefifioner could
mu: amd fhc impuymd firder»To.q1y ;
is peased whhaut any
rmtwiahstanéing the V ” ‘» b’ ~
mmay, the The
propm the impugned
ax-der, fi1thor’n:y with a
d?u*ect,ion in .’n¢qui1-ad under law and
than pang wtmid maet the ends
.. i_mpu@ed cram” at Anrmmre-A passed
“byt11:eidrespcndent’sha’ehyquaIh:ed
The mtire mam» is rmitzed bad: to the
I uvunr vi nmnntnennfl nuurr «vane. yr l\J’-M”‘<.§VU-'ht!-*iI\.i"'i i"'IlL'Pi'1 Luunl Ur AAKIVHIHAH rnurl LUUKI ur !\HKIw'-\H-\l\.H filtzff uvum
id wM1adhm&mmmM
an -mqtziry as required under law. laser the{ _
Sdfi-5 ;
petitrianar and then pass V.
‘m ‘ ‘ .’:
iv} Ho mam.
_ .35 <.§Ezm§ mo Enou xmi §<.Ezx$. we Esau :9: §<Ez§a 3 _.§:: 22:. S_:E.,:__S. 3 .§.,., .E§:.. ..