IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD
DATED TI-IIS THE NIH DAY OF' N0vEMBI3.R,"'-QVQGEI. ~ V.
BEFORE
THE HONBLE MR.JUST1'ICE"H,_B--ILLé'.}5I3A_
WRIT PETITION No.°é58--1,é/2009 " ~.
Between:
Sri.Ramesh S / 0. Yall-appa M-0tekar,',,
Aged 50 Wzars, « f u
Occ: Accountant, ' I I _
Residing at: Ilnd I\/Iain,"SI1ivaj_in:agé;1°.,V "
Belgaum. ,; ' - .. PETITIONER
(By,
ANO': *
The Managing .D.'iret;.toI",
,N§WKI?TC, Cenetrai Office,
_ " {}b1<.1;1I Road, Hubii,'
DIIeIrwad.
._ IIfi=z3etII:f',""PersonneI and
' ,__Appe1I.a'Le.V_A1,1thority,
P:iSR'jI'C Central Office,
K. . A 'Road, Bangalore. .. RESPONDENT
_ {B.ySrI.ShIvakumar s. Badawadagi,Adv.)
This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 85 227 of
the Constitution of India, praying to quash the”‘order
bearing No.42/0’7/558 dated 117.2009 passe¢d’~._bj.( ‘the
respondent no.1 (AnneXure–K), and etc. _ ‘ »t
This petition coming on for prelinqiinary jV’i1earing._.i
this day, the Court made the fo11owing:–
oansga
In this writ petition”u’n–d.er Articles2’2v6i=a1ivdw2–27 ofui’
the Constitution ofindia,g__the._petitioner«hasvgiicailed in
question, the order “dated7_g1I{_,’7.2’E)Q’9;’passed by the lat
respondent, Vide AnneXure–K;- _ _ ‘V ,
2. ;’i’ihegggi”1earned ~’Co’u;i’s¢’1V.._fqi« the respondents
subvniitted atrrit_’vpetiti_on cannot be entertained as
the ‘appeal ‘ ibj,::”t’rie petitioner challenging the
inn pugneid’ orderhis penidiing before the 2nd respondent.
is not in dispute that the appeal filed by
ehiallenging the impugned order is pending
before ‘the; second respondent in appeal No.399/2009 ie.
it it Annexure ‘L’, The petitioner instead of pursuing the
“appeal has approached this court with this writ petition.
“Therefore, the writ petition cannot be entertained.
L«»~'”