Karnataka High Court
Sri U G Anantharamachar vs The Assistant Revenue Officer … on 28 September, 2010
INTHEHKH{COURTOFKAMWU%KAATBANGAUNH3
DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF SEPTEMEERQO :9
BEFORE
THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE ASHQK B..--fi1NCHI'éERI V': S' v
WRIT PETITION NOS.29639--64:3 OE 2&3
BETWEEN
1.. SR1 U G ANANTHARAMAC}{_}'§R..:_ _V
S/O LATE GOPAI.AKRISHNAC'HA.R " -- . ._
AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS ;; A '
SMT. LEELAVATHI 'V
AOED AB_OU.'1"e3_5 Y:EARS',; _ _ .~
W/O U.O.3.ANANT11ARAMcHAR V "
Ex.)
3. SMT;~LT.,A.q_SAV'?ITHAjt ''
AGED ABOUT 49 '{E}ARS._
D /O U.O.ANAmTLARA;v;cHAR,
4. SR1. U,AA,S:qAd'E1§D.EALII§E"f 0:' 5 ~ .,
(BBMPL RAJARAJESWARI NAGAR,
BAN GALORE660093
3. THE COMMISSIONER, ,0
ERUHATH BANGALORE MMIANAGARA RALIKE
(BBMP],N.R.SQUAR'E, " ._ _ "
13ANGALORE~560o02 ..."'RESPONDENTS '}
(BY:SRI K.N.PUTTEGO__WDA. ADvj;) -- :
THESE WRIT PETITONS "EIL'ED UNDER ARTICLE
226 AND 227 OF THE 'CIO'"NsT--iITL:ITI'O.NOI? INDIA PRAYING
TO CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS. fQN»THE FILE OF
THE RESPONDENTS PERTAININ.G,TO"SITE"NOS. 81, 82,
H5, ms ex, Ri?;sREC:TIVE~L3%. THE ABOVE
PETITIONERSCIN .AT""KENGERI VILLAGE 3:
HOBLI, 1BANGAL"C-RE'SO'U_TE§. BANGALORE NOW COMING
UNDER THE-.40 RIsDIC.TION»»OE BBMP AND ETC.
ITHESETETITIONS COMINGS ON I=-'OR PRELIMINARY
. «_ HEAR'ING_"TI;IIs I3AY.___TH:E COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
-_r1’I”01.ettfpxettttollers’ only grievance is that their
‘.Vrepresetivt,.atiOI1, dated 7.12.2009 (ArIrIexure–C) and the
0′ if_’}eg.éIE’«-._I:1OtiCe, dated 30.4.2010 {Annexurewb} for the
0 tfallsfer Of khatha have remained unconsidered.
fifiéi
2. These peiitions are disposed of with a
direction to the respondent No.1 to considerwifhe
petitioners’ said representation and the 1egaE.__in~V___
accordance with law and issige the” ‘*
order/ endorsement within two r11o’nt.h_fs ‘fI*’O1’I;k»..t0d.’c’1_’,7. ‘ 76 ‘
3. No order as to costs.
VGR