High Court Karnataka High Court

Fakkirappa Hanamantappa Holer vs The State Of Karnataka on 22 July, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Fakkirappa Hanamantappa Holer vs The State Of Karnataka on 22 July, 2008
Author: S.Abdul Nazeer
11»: THE HIGH cowcr or mmarmm
cmcurr amen arr DHARWAD L
DATED THIS THE 22:") DAY of JULY    «

QEFGRE

'i'I-IE HOWBLE MR. JUs*1fzC.g__ S. A'i3_§UL N.é..Z€:_.s;_m:I: k  % %
L€aI'I1€d HCGP is  _tc_>_ ivfigitice for the

responéents. H 

2.   ':'%as§,:n?fi1::-- contend that they have
filed an aAp';)u1i£:gtionV_.6;fi'€59'.-i"I;«2D06 under section  of the

Karnataéfiia   ('Pr&:1ibifion of Transfer of Certain

'V x 1978,  resumption and mstitufion of the

 'ii;  It is further contended that the saici

' V'   app1i¢§é§{ion_Iié;é§V_ ziet iaeen consiéered by the 234 respémdent.

  ¥;i1_;erefoz'ti,v "thrzy have has film}. this writ petition seelcing the

 _ fidfiowiixg reliefs:

 " (a) Issue a writ cf mandamus directifig the
2"' respondent to cm::.sis;?.er anfi dispose of the

application dtd.9. 1 1.2606 filraé by the p€1’_itiO3;1€I’S

Vida A1:m€:xum~A.

(10) Issue any other older or direction ‘
E-*i01:1’bie Court deems fit in theJei1fcumst.e’fieee:Vof” i.
the ease, in the interest ofjusfiiee A’

3. i have heard learned for

4. The material on ‘re¢or’r9;;’–elear1;;%”e%3£;§b1ishes that the
mmmmmshmeeedeegeggmufigmabn flmmism3

reason why 1§}:ie'”2¥}’i”:e’spen§ient. Vsh._oiz_:1d.z;1ot consider the said

app1icati.<3z1–Vov:2;t':AV"e:§e-ei t 'T.._e15efo1e, I direct the 235

respondentflto '-considei-~._fhev application in accordance

with Law after cu:'£z1e%Vnotv:iCe'at:o_al1:::_i§1e parties concerned. The 22:1

.I',f:.S:[§)OIid,S;é1t'v Sh0111dV.'C(}I3§id{'3':" the said application as above

V. months from the date of receipt of the

the contentions of the parties are kept

Vopeu. the writ petition is disgosed of. No costs.

.. HOG? is penzaitted to fiie her memo of

' –"*..-Ce within eight weeks from today.

Sd/-

Judge

CS