High Court Karnataka High Court

B Vinay vs The Tahsildar on 30 June, 2009

Karnataka High Court
B Vinay vs The Tahsildar on 30 June, 2009
Author: N.K.Patil
$
3
§
Q
x
Q
E
§
§
@E
E
E
3&5;
Q
:9?»
%
3
$3
ié
3
E?
E
Q
E
3
E
E&a
Q
3*
W
§
Q
Q
E
Q
3
%
§
3

 

*2 Mwwmi WEE" E&;mm%mm.§%M%  z::mwm"*W %%%N%"Wa%& §*E%€§E"#§ mww Q?  

is THE HIGK coum 01? KARHATAKA AT aancaamaz 5 f i 7;  .
DATED mm THE saw my 05* JUNE 2:309   A    7

1339023  % 
rm:-tonmm hm.JUS'I'ICE nxcmm L

Wm' ggtsm. no, 18283    

Betwaux

BVRIAY  
s/0.1arnamsxAR A 

AGED 19YEARS    _ 
PRIYADARSI-mil  _ _    
POSTBILALKOPPA      
KOWATALUK     \ 
cImaaAGALURTnIsf:'RIam* 5??%%114%%k%L  .. PE'I'1"I'IOB"ER

{By has A, mm-azg j$1~Lé;%1*%%% as K smnmsrma,
 

 KGPPA 
' ._   DISIRICT 5?"? 126

 -V 2  KARHA'T£§.i(A

 REFBY rrs SECRETARY
 * %:sc>cm. WELFARE DEPARTMEHT
=  Emmy scxmna

EAKGAI.»(.'}RE 5613 (I31 .. RES%I'fI}EH'I'S

  A  % sax c....IAGADzsH, spasm Govr. £s.I3VE')CA'I'E)



i fiwwfiarwfifi WW wmggmmammm 'W$WW mwwwmw, war' wmwmmammm--wnawm mwwma war' mmmmmmmswm ruwn mwwwma Mr mmmwmamaw-Q Wawm wwwwwgg Wyn mmmmflgflmm mm?" %"Wmfi'
' '. ' :0

This writ  is fixed under 
227 cf the Censfitutixm sf India praying
entzix-aracardsfi-omt}:efi]enftheR1 
ordm cit. 11.3.2002 from the E12 afR2_;uf"n*=1e 
mama and sat-aside the  aafidcqx _di" 2hc~ R1"-- dt.j' 

24.6.2099

Vida Am:-A and ¢tr3.=.__

This petition ‘cm 2

ma day, the Cami made -§ar11awing:’

n V

Le.-armed Smog” _t_’_:.-chaocatc: acoapix

nafice my L

inmugma :*4;.o5.2oo9 issued by the:
‘I’am11dar’ , 13.1′ mm: wide
1§e..Jathi:i5;<i.gya C. R;~ .151-w/2m1o vicie Arxnexurea-A

aftide State t

Ha.S'Gim 713 sap 9:3 Vida
far as it withdraws tbs herafim af
to Maalmu communitty, in this inwresst of

fin int writ' petiizixm.

3. Hm.-.1 mm counsel far the the

learfi Special t Adwaaéébe,

mpondmm. The mm Spaéifii

at the name: submiwd
be dismissed as net the
said tsuhmxxiasican, the
Iiarnamlw. Tram & om
~ Etc.)
Act, 1990, wlx-2<1'm'n Act; the

-W hem an
Assistant subdmaian.

‘I’11er%:re, petiii mxmcyt

% we-;a;%% ~getitic:n. In the light if the
915 far the rwpondmta and after
of of tha Karxmmka scheanzea
Tribw & crmm Backward Chasm

W App¢:t Em.) Act, 1990, in fact I

that the petifiom has got an ¢fi’ect1ve’

fiedy ts: mdrma his grirevafi izzfiare the

7’32 mwwma mam” wmmmmma MBMM mmwamm §~§§@E~«E fifiififi? 6;}? %fie.%N&T&%fl Wfififi fiiflim? £3? mmmmm E’~§£@«§*% awwm fifi mmmmm Hifi-WE mm

%M—-*~*”””

I

. %W-Wmfil Wk?” m~mwm§mm& WEMW msMwmm,_.m,:w” mmmmfiwmmw-W Wawm wwwma wax mmmzmmamszwm wxwrm mwwmm wax mM,m.mm.am.mm wiww m..:w’mm£ mt?” zmmmwmtmsmm {WWW ammwgm

Assistant Commhsmrm as pmvidad mm Sanction +;g§3kLkk%

of the Karnatalm Scheduled cmm, S-cheziuled ‘ _
Othar Backward Claasw [Rwemvatbn gs? AV
Etc.) Act, 1990. , was-mu:
opinion on the mmim of the
disposed of rasazcvitg

Revmmna ‘§}:1x.3;_1:ft¢#day. 2::

same as at any rats witlfix

tgyfi Véfine af zwfipt of the appeal filed by

….. 14

‘ med spam’; Gem-mm: Advocate is

fia’#1fifidmflehkmanaofa wi&mEm

, _

sa/.g;_
Judge