BE THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA2 AT BANGALORE W.P.N0.150?3 of 2638
QUASH THE caumcaruns 0:: THE R2 AT SL.NG.12 nu ANX-F THE LIs*r"'o.F
MPANELLED CANDiDATE$ ANNOUNCES ON '1,3.2£308 AWARDNQV
EANK SENCE HER A§3PL£GATi0N BEAFHNG NC}.-4 VSDE .ANX~«G ES
mug cowsasrs 05 FAi.$E #NFORMAT¥ON AND NEE{)_$""TQ'_~.$E
CRSCARDED AT THE TSME OF SCRUTINY HSELF.
THIS WRFF Prsrmow comma on 50:2 PRELtMI§:AR\E " V
was DAY} THE COURT MADE THE FGi.LOW3t~3Q:: - " A
Petitioner in this petition
the appiicatian refipfindent
dated 23"} Novam§er G and the
interview 2003 Vida
Annexure-G3 fgyspondent by the
first raaapcrgjdeérgf mt at 3!! eligible as per
terms of Aheaggajffi Jscquash the candidature ef
fife :fespt$:"1:¥:€£§i'§vfv1_1'_§j';v:SI.No-12 in Annexure -F thé fist
Zlvflf Tfiéfididates announced on 13' March 2008
vawa§-;i§'rég«sé¢%1i§§i'A:é§1k since her application beating Ne_4
vidg finfwézfuré - G prima facie consists' of £3159
vvénd needs to be ifiscarded at the time of
IN '33-:fJ:£ I-afJCiH é
§(~}U3¢'J' (-)1' K~A#+'\EA'--f3:M<--A -Alt' flAN£aM" .(-JR-H W«_«f-'-,«Na»_1§9'.';'g fif'g;;3g
3
8%' THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE W.P.No.150?3 of 2038
2. The grievance of petitioner in the ins-,tantvxsl_€r'l3,'_~~..Vv'
petition is that, the first rwpondent - Corporariérril *
leaned the Notification dated 3"' November V
for apmmuons from the eligible can¢:l'%da'E'!éS's ' f<3'r'*5iFA'Al;::j4f:¥'*1.l'«'*lV'%'l§'rj:VA
cf LPG Distributorship under lags Afe_:s":~--r;Va t"'6'2':
locations in Karnataka. Pr;rsuant----rri"L_thé*'-»$.ar1rré;'wtrtirnner
as well as seccmd u filed weir
applicafiona for at 62""
location, Le. Chamarajanagar
District. the first
respcanderrf : h the impugned
ncticelcemmirfiirsaiiozfi Lip: second respondent,
:_.:-ifiiirhatlifiia $zec<:irir3'v*rr:zr;pondent to appear before the
Ct3i'_"_.wifl1 all the necmary criglnal
ififiéaid communication! notice issued by
. .4 :'_{"h,rrrp:?rationvV_§1§de Annexure G3 cannot be sustained on
the second respondent has given a wreng
. V'V:"d.le.§l;;r§ation in the applicatian filed by her produced at
IN THE HIGH CDURT OF KARNATAKAz£AT BANGALORE W.PiNe.!Sl3?3 of 2008
Annexure (3 and she does not own any property
name to estabiish that, she cwns any go-down
infrastructure m per the terms arm. conditidfiéii
Notification. The petitioner has r*.'§_i_1i-i;ed'ii':'si§%:i.1"»v
second resnondent has been
case, the Corporationv ought'«~ViViiL§:t""~t9' iiéve» is-ssued
ncficeicommunication ta since. she
does not quaiify.«ijr;r called for
interview. by second
responder; the threshoid and
C°"S8<1UeififlY'; ..~~'t¥'.1e impugned notice!
communicatiiin car:1rmAt sustained. Therefore,
'iietitioriisér igérein feaif 'naazessitated to present the instant
_ _ ?_ petitioner.~~ V 3
3.§é’ii?50I’=,. appropriate reliefs, as stated supra.
” lvidéiiig-vA.:’heard teamed counsel appearing for
Aft” °a”°-‘f’-1′ perusal of the material availabie
including the prayer sought in the writ petifign,
5
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANG.ALGR.E W’.P.N0.l50?3 of N68
it emerges as rightly and fairiy submitted by the iearn[§§dT
counsei far petitioner that, the premises of the ”
has been inspected by the team of T’ 1 V
respondent — Corporation and when; baefi .v
ranked No. 1, flue first respondegv’ _-;- C:firp;:5rat§onV
to have issued notice to agipear
before it aiong with afl vide
Annexure G3 dated bearing
the secand
resptmdent ggoéieme certificate
vide Anneaguré -‘bear the signature 0!’
Sea’ of the aufliority game. It is the case of
p9fifi°”e_”; ‘fl’3t~ f€$p;3ndent does net own any
she is ineiigible to be awarded the
} LPG” However, after perusal of the
6
.No.l50?3 of 2008
TARA AT BANGALORE W-9
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARN5»
seen mat, the authorities are yet to take a decision
respect of item Nos. 1 to 5 to find out wiwethwf’ ”
seaond respcndent has been called vf:1~r f:he V
her case will be considered and tné ofvjsetjiinnefvfwiii
be ignored, has prwentecg. when
the respondent – (}orpor§ti¢f3n.VV ” ihe spot 1
inspection in tiwei” the
auflmrities are as per the
terrns and :”*’.’§:c’1it}!ic:art§<3n vide Annexure A.
The petitioner this Court that, the
authoritias , are. iii'{eiy-., 19% cnnsider the request of the
? RE W.P.No.150'?3 of:
{N “ms HIGH COURT OF xaaxamnca AT BANGAL0
aspects of the matter as per the terms and
the Notification and also the availability of
with me respective candidates. Therefare,1.énté§t?fefe.?iceV ”
by this Court, at this stage, by
application filed by second respqndéfit. not: V
and the same-_ is premature in is
entitled ta invoke the exi;;_é ‘3.. sf this
Court in the proceedmgsuaat gs fécaafimpseted by
meiurismenar respoaaem —
Cormration. .
5- “3f3V5f*$A ‘fi=’%-‘Q;$if_c_:iA«tc»a vfaezts and circumstances of
the C335. “by petitioner is disposed
9f: W’-“‘~59’Y*fff9 1556-11ytaV;9et&idriér to redrws his grievance
Wfme fifev }”3Pl37C¥’if–5=3t_8H._A.%ompetent authority, at the
“3Pp’+°9’f53*3_ if he is so advised er need arise.
Ordgrégj
Sd/~
Judge