IN THE HIGH COURT or-' KARNATAKA, A T & DATED THIS THE 27m m%oF»m', = " BEFORE? _ . _ THE HON'BLE MR. Jus'rIcE%FjIey§M_ MORAN R3190? WRIT PE'I'1'I'ION N0[329:é1 [Lg-Brag) BETWEEN i ' A IWSVARNA BUi§[§}E'ai§_S 210.2212, 1s':5*M231NRQ D._QR'€}S$'3, JAYAMAHAL Bg\HG;z:f\I4O¥?E_V45; '_ 7 = V PETITIONER (By Sri : H Kamfnfi aéhgm, -edgy -- _ _ ' -- -. ..;()€§4!b!'hvd'iSSIONER L % ~--BRUHflTH,. ;':iANGALoR12 MAI-IANAGARA PALIKE, ' __BAH.c;A;LoRE. ' .2 Ti~af$mssr REVENUE OFFICER " r BASAVANAGUDI RANGE. , BRUHATH BANGALORE MAI-IANAGARA PALIKE, 'BANGALORE. RESPONDENTS
V ” (By spa : G NAGARAJALU NAIDU, ADV FOR R1 65 2)
THIS WRYF PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING T0
QUASH THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT l3T.20.2.2007.
LSSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 AT ANNEXURE-A.
9 wk
THIS PETITION, COMING ONMFOR .FREfgI’MfNARY’ _ v
HEARING m ‘B’ GROUP, 1*:-us DAY THE c:ou12’r M5211: THE
FOLLOWING:
_3….I.2.».;’1v-*:_-3,
The petifianer tq right,
title and interest war bearing
No.59/1, 4″-‘1 Bangalore
under a on 26-OT-2005
an application fior
transfer gbf the respondents resulting
in ‘ am; 20-02400? Anncxure-” =’
I that his applimfitm for transfer
xiii’ considered only after disposal of the
_ varifius suits pending before Competent courts
,this writ petition.
2. Then: is oonsidsxablc force in the submission of
. f’Sri. H. Kantha Raja, learned counsel for the petitioner
that the respondent-Corporation, without extending an
opportunity to the petitioner to have his say gover
M
3
whether the proceedings in
0.S.No.2()O/1997. 0.S.No. 1211992 * V T
0.8.1813/1992 have or have pct :33
immovabie property in 2 the
endorsement A1mexu1e§’F}S”._
3. The extended an
opportunity ” his say without
which of coming to a
eoneiusiioslp in the afoxesmd suits
were or have a bearing over the
V’ of of immovable property in question.
substance in the contention that the
. Am1exure–“A” sufiem from violation of
‘ ‘ ‘ 1 f « :of natural justice.
In the chmmstances, this writ pe¥:it1on’ is
“eefiowed. The endorsement Annexure–“A” is quashed
and the pmceeding remitted to the 2136 respondent to
consider the pet:itioner’s applimtion along with. the
M
documents produced by him and
of hmring to the petitiormr and
accordance with law.
KS