IN mm HIGH coma': or xanmrmm, %
DATEB THIS THE 13th DAY or '
TI-IE HoN'BL1: am. JUSTICE
WRIT PETITION No; (SF
BETWEEN
SR1 H MAHESH V A
S/{) HANUMANT;1APPA;_' . _
AGE:38 YEARS
No.33o," NEW .:¥jz.AN*i':§;)>. u$é S"Ri:>AD
KUVEM-EUN:'.GA?I,'~m'S(}REv;-__ - -
. . .- ...PETI'I'IONER
(By Sxfi : A SR'IDHVAIA?;._}&L"§'{f )
TRANSPORT OFFICER
. "'~MYSO'R__E.é2WEST
M3§SO.RE.
2 TzHE:REG'IONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE
.. * ._MYSORE--WES'I'
= 'MYSORE.
THE S'I'A'"I'E op KARNATAKA
BYYfi§SECREDflfi"H)GOVT
TRANSPORTDEAPARNWENT
MS§BUHIflNG, _
IQAMBEDKARVEEDI
BANGfiLORE.
§".RESPONBENTS
K'.
out to the fact that the petitioner continues to operate
the driving school from the very same premises. The
RTO dissatisfied with the explanation, issued _4e.tjotth.er
notice dated 31.12.2008 Armexure F', _
petitioner to produce the docume:1t__ in " "
fact of operating from the very
by yet another notice dated G, * L'
once again, calling upon thefietifioner to -- the
docum:en1:s ," A~§'.é,g3'f}]'nMV 1_:t1eWlice11c:e issued earlier
would this petition to quash
the notices A_o;1eXures and G and for a mandamus
'toeltize ist respondent to renew the licence.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits
Jthat the landlord of the premises in question has
1~__’i;’:Vistii,i3ted o.s.219/2009 on the file of the Pr}. Civil
VT “Judge (Jr.m1.) Mysore, arraigning the petitioner’s wife
the Iessee as party defendant, for the relief of ejectment
and vacant possession of the schedule property as
disclosed in the copy of the plaint Annexoge fr: “‘
merefore, until the petitioner
the plaint schedule property,
knowledge of the said fact,”‘e:.;V;:n.not V’
the petitioner to produce “to the
leaseholdrights and filieny renewal of
license.
1 ” Adfvoeate submits that the
RTO consider the plain’ t in
2069» $.91 releeant record/document pursuant
:to.Lfl*1e Annexures F and G and pass orders
“t§1eif_r.’oI1, oieeordanee with law, within a. reasonable
e me.
Having heard the learned counsel for the
T ‘j)o1*’o’es, undoubtedly, Anne:-mres~F and G being
: notices calling upon the petitioner to produce
documents to establish the fact of operating the driving
school firom the premises in qucsfidfi, _ V’
circumstances do not call for i11tc§rferf:’11ce;_ -1′ — . “V ‘
Recording the submis§i§f;;» of
Advocate, nothing sL1t1Ii_vé’s~._fo:*’c-consideration.
The writ ofi’.
CS9