High Court Karnataka High Court

M/S Jnanesh Institute Of Nursing vs The State Of Karnataka on 4 March, 2010

Karnataka High Court
M/S Jnanesh Institute Of Nursing vs The State Of Karnataka on 4 March, 2010
Author: K.Sreedhar Rao Gowda


AGED 4;; YEARS.

A {By P SOMASHEKARAIAH)

I

IN THE HIGH comm’ OE KARNATAKA, _

DATED THIS THEE 4th DAYQE MAE~eHIf2Q . _ I ”
PIaEsE1§f I I I
THE HONBLE MR. JLIEEICEIK_E’EEELé:4iA;E:{§AQj’;

THE HONBLE ;Gor$ALA GOWDA

w.A.

BETWEEN; 2 53:_–.’_ ~ I

M/S. qNAN’Es’H’%.Ns7’1T_UrE OF.,I\{URSING.
No.3:”sY.No;;29/i;,.’ _
SONNENAHALLI;’=-§:ENG~ER:.. EOELI.
BANGALORE SOUTH TA_IL’EJ}’i’.
BANGALORE.

REPRESENTEDE1.’ ITS SEZCRETARY.
SHRI KEMPARAJU.

S,-‘GS?-I C1su;~:KA’ ”

APPELLANT

AND:+ I -.

‘ I .1, “ME STATE OF KAENATAKA,

I “-._RE’,P’}”ED BY ITS SECRETARY’
.. * DEPARTMENT OF’ CO–OPERATIVE.
M S BUILDING.

BANGALORE.

IQ

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF’
CO~OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,
2″” DIVISION, 350.146, BRIE? MAIN ROAD.

!_’J

(3.

iv

STI-I CROSS, IVIARGOSA ROAD.
BANGALOREWOS

THE CO«OR DEvE1,opMIa:N’r-‘<j't«"I~'ICI::'R AN}; I

SALE OFFICER. '

OFFICE OF THE) ASSIS'1'AN'I'bA:I=?.I:3'GIVS'I'R.IXI4§._OI: ~. "

COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES.
2ND DIVISION. NO.146.'-SR?)

aw CROSS. MARGOSA RQAD,
BANGALO;RE–03.__. . 'V

THE sECRETARY";'I-

BAPUJI co-op HQI_JSI_§\! CISbC’I’Eff’§5..’L’£f’:wITED.

BAPUJINAGAR. _ _

‘I’I~IE’. 5<j1R.-CLE" 1'Ns;51=:E,:v*19'§éA}<;AS';«~1,'

W 5/0. LAf:*1awM'«v RUITJRACIIAJR
AGEZID 40 YEARS,
R/A'I'».NO.4 ;. MAIN ROAD.

VIJA'{A:–\JAGAR, ATI'IGUPPE.

'' _BA;\3GAL01{<E;-40.

' I SI%.«f§jI3 '1i3§'R. SATHISH,
5,50 LATE) M. v. RIEDRACHAR;

AGED 40 YEARS.

R”/AT No.41. 151′ MAIN ROAD.

I I I” 2 QVIJAYANAGAR, ATTI GU PPIE.

-A ‘ BAN GALO R1340.

THE CHIEZF MANAGER.

VIJAYA BANK.

ASSET RECOVERY MANAG EIVIENT BRANCH.
PUBLIC UTILITY BUILDING.

4

MA”1N..R’o.A:3. I

MAYOHALL, M G ROAD.

BAN GALO REC.

m;$§t>(jN:3i’}j;N’i-‘.:3_T’ .

THES WRF1′ APPEZAL ES I~”.IL’E[–)_ S }4*7I.0I}* _’I’,HE_ V

KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT TC’-_S-EfI’..ASII3{_E

‘I’H13 ORDER PASSED IN “1:’HE;._ “WR1’T_’ ..;>gT1:j’=;QN_

NO.394’i /2010[C.S-RES) DATVE?D_’_O(5/0’2_/2010. . . V

Thls appeal 15; c:01111ng ‘L’L»._<T3"n i"or '0r'(fiC:9s .3113 day,
SREEDHAR RAO, J., c{<__-:1i\rerec¥V_1=h_€-'v.fQHQ\2vi1'i§;\/

LU;I2£;M__§;r:Lf:»

The 1€"3&1F11t'.d Sir1.g1cv.:..I:%:.:dVg'9_"h2,is p;iSsi;§d £1 Conditiionai

ir1t.e1'ir1'3 01'd6t1';V'*.'.Ve:.VV_d'0A r10f{°i7i1_1d. any grounds to interfere with
the irnpugnéd 0:'de'1"".~ A'.I".~1_é'~-\.,\br"1*iEJ appeai is dismissed. However,

Lhe E';1.'11'1%:*._ f0r.V<:iepOIsi1t ()f"t:11e a1m0L1n'1 di1'eo1,ed by the Ieelrned

"*S.:;ig1é ;f"u'dge¢&_is exiifiaed by 15 days from the date or this

Sé/73
ESGE

sd/~
IUDGE

NM