High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri Guru Raghavendra Cotton … vs The State Of Karnataka By Its … on 21 April, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Sri Guru Raghavendra Cotton … vs The State Of Karnataka By Its … on 21 April, 2009
Author: Ajit J Gunjal
IN THE HIGH COURT 0:2 KARNATAK_A__ ' : ~

CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWADK:   

DATED THIS THE 213? DAY 2):? AQPRIL: 

BEF0RE 7__  A

HON' 311: MR. .:US*r1:(':5:%Am' a.Guh_a,,rAL,' "  

WRIT PEITFPION Nos.5g299§ 6f;32§9_oF 2009 {APMC1

1.

BETWEEN :

SR1 GURU”RAGHAVia:N§3Rfs..CQT'”f’G:N”
JINNING ‘A2333 PFeEss:–NG ‘FAC3’i”O–R’.ér’
BYYFSP5RT,N’.ER .

SR1 B MQULALI .S]{);B’ FAKIRAPPA
AC’?ED 53’Yg?,ARi’3., – ‘ ”

‘1£;?IARAT£VC}{>’!?Ai;R}’~.~C_}’&s sons
3:? YES PROPR’§E’i’QRV..4
SRLM G RAa}ARAO ‘–

s/0 M. GOPALRAOV’

; ‘AGED ABQUT 53 YEARS

.B7b?r}i ARE GENERAL MERCHANTS

« ” ” AM; GONE-MISSION AGENT

‘APM(_: YARD, BELLARY.

PETITIONERS

(B”{_SR1. CHANIDRASHEKAR PATIL, ADV.,)

. ‘ HATHE STATE) OF KARNATAKA

BY ITS SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF’ CO~OPERATION
M.S.BUILDING, BANGALORE.

THE DIRECTOR, AGRICULTURAL MARKETING
RAJBHAVAN RAOD
BANGALORE-560 001

THE SECRETARY I
AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKETI
BELLARY, DIST: BELLARY ‘ «–

(BY SR1. R K I-IA’I”l’I, ace? FDR’-R11 s;Ré’A:s_:D…
MALLIKARJUN C BASAREDDY, mg sADv.,
(VAKALATH NmjF1LED))___

THIS PETITION ‘FIxLE.I)-_ 1};j’i)EuI’x’~3DIV’;’&:I?TICLES 226 65 227
OF COSNTITUTION OF INDIA’ =PRAY”i!§’G’TO QUASH THE

ORDER Ii)A’1’EI}< 5.9.2003' jPReD1;cEDjr«.s' ANNEXURE-F–I
AND 2 PASSED'«§3jr* THE 12E:s*s19c2ND;EIn;frWHo.3 AND E'I'C.,

OIVI PRELIMINARY HEARING
THISFIBAY, THE FOLLOWING:

' K! .:{§.:RDER

" I' Mr. Bésamddy submits that he has been

enter appearance in this writ: pctifion. He is

A the power in the regstry.

2;;

Mr. R K Hatti is directed to take noficc for

‘A.VV’rt2..€IDondcnt Nos. 1 and 2.

3. Eventhough the matter is listed for preliminary

hearing with consent it is taken up for final disposal, “H1 as

K’

four Weeks.

much as these Writ petitions are covered by ruling of this

Court in w P No. 31098 of 2003 disposed of on 13.2}-11:19.

Following the Ieasonings stated therein this writ

stands disposed of permitting the

construction withm’ a period of six” of

communication of the sanction __ fhc

not completed within a of ” the

order] notice impuged – .pctit5;o’n- zeiating to
forfeiture shall stand and the site

would be forfgiteiij by tt;eV§§P1xm[V*’I%et:fi¢n«:;iands disposed of

I.\Vr1r; K Hatti is permitted to file memo of

Sd/*
“JUDGE