High Court Karnataka High Court

Smt Manjula vs The State Of Karnataka Rep By The … on 10 April, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Smt Manjula vs The State Of Karnataka Rep By The … on 10 April, 2008
Author: K.L.Manjunath
IN THE HIGH COURT or xmnmmm AT 

am-an mm mm 10" mm or APR.II.';':_:"2f}£lVS""

B$FC>RE

mm aownnz MR. JUs'1'Ic£ .__ "

WRIT pzrxwxou m.52a "oF zbaa  

BETWEEN: V_
1 $14-1' mmum   

w/o  
mm A_BQt)T_ 34;'  
R/AT   N9' .163"mwm:n moon

KA xo  
  :4: post-
Ywaamuia  55- 

(,e_s_;_ s::i_.»;   uI.I.A1.,A:>v. )

  V1 '1.'f':'-'Eh "sTi$:rfi'."L::32F:: 

1221:-»--mr _*.I-m_:4j'..'szcxez1'Amr
3  or xmmm-AKA

 2   ssronm

 EAiNGAI.OR£--65
.. mspoxmxwrs

  sz-:.-i. :B.VRKRAPPA, MA Fox 121;

8RI.A APPA?G2R2)



arms W.P. 13 FILED mama m'rIcJ:.ns 226 or
1' cousmnmxmz or INDIA, mums -1-o:m_m:c'r
'rns122wo1mmA:.Lcmmmor_*ruscaam:r.za::usx
'I'D Tm pm:-rxozmn. 

'1'h:i.a Patition coming on for  
hearing this day, the court   the u 
following':  *      "

onnm '

Heard the counsel jot  

the counsel for 

   petitioner that
'V era:/"~P@°Uw"--"""*."":V"""~'.'."   ' o wiw
a 'v\   was submitted by the

 1;¢.t,-.ne'=s1um Clearanoa Board seeking

  pf  under the Scheme, "vantae

    the 2"' respondent to

V. petitioner: to pay a sum of

‘-… *.Rs.15}V1_t:o/* by means of a one! draft.

V’ According to the petitioner, for

T consideration the case of the

Q. petitioner is not oonsiderecl and an

endorsement has been issued as per Annexure-G

6/

[‘L___..

cit.15.11 .2007. Challenging the

present petition is filed and mi,

2″‘ Respondent to make

schedule house to the V V

4. The leemeo the
Slum Clearance .

objectiun in negaro of
the writ: in view
of Sea.£5§ Slum Areas
1973. If the
the cards: passed by

the of which he has

K ” ….. the t

t1Vre_’_ Therefore, he requests

V1-,o’i{;ijj;smiso the petition.

this staga, the learned counsel for

submits that the petitioner may

to withdraw the writ Petition

liberty to file an appeal before the

Government within 15 daya from today and

8/

requwts the Court to dimct the Government to

consider: the appeal, if any, filed. by the

petitioner within 15 days withaut

question of limitation. He further A’

this Court to direct V

precipitate the matter puxauafxt

6. Having heard

parties, c:ons:’L®z’:ing_ fl’c:b.’1′:’~.. $éc’:.59

of ~ 15.}: the opinicm the
petitiofiexjr has’ -~¢ ” tted to withdraw the

LA it rty for the petitionar

‘::’~i:’1e”> 15 days from today.

is filed, the Governmant

shai.3…__ the same withaut raising the

.4_f’.;’:*i”–§:u¢stién__A’1’o£ limitation. Further, this Court:

it ‘cz._ft-‘the opinion, till an appeal is filed by

i V petitioner be-fora the Government ,

«Jmspoment-2 has to be directed not to

precipitate the matter and thereafter it is
W

for the petitioner to obtain necessary Interim

order fram the t.

‘7. with the above wservation,

Petition is dism:i.ssed and if

filed, the Interim order: mgr..a;

the petitioner shall _ i:+y the

Government .