High Court Karnataka High Court

Shaik Ali S/O Rasool Sab vs The State Of Karnataka on 4 September, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Shaik Ali S/O Rasool Sab vs The State Of Karnataka on 4 September, 2008
Author: A.S.Bopanna
zawm mwwna um" namififiemfifi 1-126.5% CQLER? 05" KARNAYAKA HIGH CZQURT OF Kflfififlaffiflfi HQGH fififlfi? Q?' K&fiN&TA§{fi FEGH CQUW" Q? KARNRTAKA HWIH C

IN THE man comm' 09 1<:ARNA'I'AKflf   
cmcurr BENCH AT GULBARGA:   

DATED THIS THE 4%: DAY OF';SEP'FE1\4B;Ef§_"2.Q{}3:'«'VV  

BEF(_)RE   J X
THE I-ION'BLE MR.  A;s;B0PANfeig§ 
w.P.No.1a.185;éO05%' %(§3LREs)  

BETWEEN:     '

sum: ALI   V _   _  ' 
s/0 RASOOL says' "    V   '
AGE: ssvmgs' _ .::_  * » _  '_  
RETIREE) As.s1~:cGND '£~gy1s:Qrc._AssisTAbsT

in cm MIINICIPis§..fCOUFsICIi. 

RAICHUR --'=.§ss4_ :01'  _V _  

 PETITIONER

(By Sri sQ:.£A;¢A'1*f'4 3333?, E.-W.)

 _1  sTA'§.=§ix:$i? KARNATAKA

B"? }T'¥'S_'SE,C«-RETARY, DEPT. OF
. HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOOPMENT
 A 154.8. 1-ELFELDING, BANGALORE -1

  '. *:'§aE D{REC'FOR

QB' MUNECEPAL ADEVUNISTRATION

 'V -VVISVESHWARAIAH 'TOWER

DR, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
BANGALORE -I

3 THE ASSISTANT CONTROLLER

OP' E0091? AUDIT CIRCLE

RAI HU

n



mu emuxa we mmamm me:-a= e'-:2r:.«..:._m or mmmAm'""'me'H"meow" er' s'<iAm1A'rAm 'me:~'z' eozom' er meétmmm were eewéet ee mmmmca" Hiéeiit cl

regard. The petitioner thaefore is aggieved E5! the ..

dated 16.13200 1 and the communication dated 13.67   

4. At the time of heaxmg, 
pa"s0r1s who were simiiaxiy as  
herein were before the  oi;  Court in
W.P.Nos.38550-38554/O 1    :0. 12.200 1 and
also subsequentiy'  a   as that of the
petitioner, one   the Principal {Bench in
w.P.No.2'7309/09;,  of on 25.10.2005.
The  all the contentions quashed

the communieegdon ~ivss1.i.eci..":a.I1d directed that the action be

 éfier issvfieé of notice to the petitioner.

  the iearned Counsel for the petitioner

 the order dated 16.01.2001 has already been
  by this Court in the earlier proceedings. In that
'T of the matter, 1 do not find it necessary to do so once

 over again in this proceedings. However, the communication

dated 13.7.2006 to recover the amount from the petitiener
eanrzot be sustained and to that extent, if the same is

33



Hififi €
mm,' WWW," My wamwmgmwg Hui" Qlgytgfif my mgmnygm Hsfifi CQUR? Q? KARNAYAKQ fiififl CQURT Q? KARNATAKA HEQH COKW? 6}? mmmmm

by the respondents Within a period of three monfi1sL:'1':*om the

date the petitioner submits a copy. A ‘ A

With the above observations

stands disposed of with no oriieixfas to ¢o3ts.,