1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAI) DATED THIS THE Sm DAY OF AUGUST 2008 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRJUSTICE RAVI MALIMAA1_"H"" H
WRIT PE’I’I’i’ION NO.30362 01+’ 2003 (QMQEES): “H A”
BETWEEN:
Sri.K.Ananda Rao,
Aged 65 years
General Secretary,
Central omce, A
South Western’~Réaj1Way’~Eir3ploj?ee$’ Sangh,
– – ‘ – 3
Building No-.UBL/V897,”w__”-…__ M I
Infront of DRM’s 0fm:.e,%_%
HUBLI. x % A H
PETITIONER
_ (By “Sm’esh”S.:J:dshvi . Advocate)
u’.1~.–
South Western Railway,
V — Hub1i~Ch;b ‘Road,
2. Estate Officer and
AddI.I)ivisionai Railway Manager,
South Western Railway, __
HUBLI. .. RESFONDENTS;_
_0_0_()_
This writ petition is filed under A1’tie1es’~«2_’26je&Vi’2’27_ V
of the Constitution of India praying to”»for=1;he_
records and issue writ, order or i:iiretioI1.; « to” declare
Annexuxes-E, F & G as illegal, Witixcfut.jursidioi:ioi1:”eamie_e
authority of law.
This writ petition com’ oii for ipeeigimv iniiaxy
hearing this day, the m_a__df€~ f0110’W’«iIV’1Vg:-V
The petitioner to declare
.83. as~i_iieg_a1..’
2. V, urged by the learned counsel for
that Annexures–E, F 8; G have been
specific direction that the petitioner
V –V shoiiiai the keys of the premises in question.
K ‘V V’ ‘:j’.i’hereufoi9e, the impugiied notice at Axmexure–E would
$29/gr
amount to a mere formality and hence interference by
this Court is called for.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the A4
4. The sole contention raised
for the petitioner is unaceptable of: fact
Annexu1e–F is dated ‘V i
164-2008 and Whenvin, it has
been mentioned that to vacate
and hancioveij. — kejgts to the
cocnernedii’ ‘ » ‘iioivever, Annexure-E is
issued to’ ‘;%*.._:n;1exuxes-F 8: G. Annexure-13
has issued on 1}E:é.–‘7V’i-“‘2′}()08. By virtue of Annexure-E
V’ ‘*t1ie”§etirione1f asked to show cause as to why
should not be made again’ st him
to appear on 1«8–2008. The learned
the petitioner submitted that the petitioner
out in appearance on 1«8«2008 and sought for
354…
further time to submit documents and to make
submissions.
5. Therefore, placing reiiance V on ~ _ it * u
show cause notice issued to t11e:’».pctitioner. ‘asking!
Why he should not be evicted in a of of *
this Court and the SupremeV__{.’}o1u_t, no
interference is called notices are
isssued and .3: the stage of
show cause ipfholly and would
lead In this View of the
matter, nothing more than a. show
cause ‘notice pursuance whereof Annexures-F 65
cifelevance to the same. I do not find any
reason The writ petition being devoid of
. merits isaccordixlgly rejected.
3 v is newless to mention that in the gven
_cifcumstances since it is held that Annexure~E is a
%!%g””
show cause notice no order of eviction could be passed
unless the petitioner is heard in the matter.
Rsk/ –
sd%[–.; A} » % Q