WT' NO.l8366:'2006
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 2673 DAY OF JUNE 2003
BEFORE'.
ms Homam ma. JUSTICE K. '
WRIT PETITION N0.18366__,12t1Q6 (c;M§'RfiS;
BETWEEN'
Sri K R Srinivas,
S} 0 Rama Sanjeevaiah,
Age: 45 years, V " _
Worlcing as Production Assistant, 2;] 1 ' V
1'.)oordarsIaanaKe.nd:~a,
GI1i1>a11za--535 104- ' Petitioner
(By Sri I 7 fair petitioner)
1. Prasaraharthi; ' '
4_ €3o1'po1*a{1Q_1;_ pf India,
Dd0rda"1*sha;fi= Kéndra,
epxbjax-gg-5_s5.%1o4;, "
Director,
2:. Scmétr Asimmistxatxvc Ofiiocr,
_ Pxasarabarthig
' " * u Bmadcasfing Cozporation of India,
s Kendra,
G=uiha:=garS85 104.
3. The Sccrctaiy,
._ " ~. Souhardha Clredit
Co-operative Socieety,
.. No.44}, 1*' Floor, 50 feet road,
wp NO. 1 mamas
29*' Cross, 1" Block,
Banashankari,
Srinagar,
Bangalore»-50.
4. Smt. Vccn R Murthy,
W/0 C A Ramachandra Murthy,
Age: 35 years,
No. 117:9, D GQA Houshzg Complex,
J C Nagar,
Bangalorc~O6.
5. Mr. Ramax;handra.Mm1:hy, .
Property and Wardmbc' 'A38i3t1§f1Ti,' . 'A
Dooxdagrshan Ke11c3n;1,"'{.. 2: =
Jcniagar. % % %
Bangalore-560 (E16; ' , Respondents
(By Smt. Lagjaa gmd 2)
(By Sri Vishwranath R 'z;g=;ge;1e,_Rw1v;; for rm)
..;......
Writ Pctiticnv is filed under Articles 226 8:. 227 of the
Cfozistituizioix cf Imiia, prajiihg to dimct the R-1 to withdmtw the order
dated 3.«3_.2'C!_06 Annexure-B passed by R-2 on his behalf by
censjiéringTAthc«Vre;)1=c;§§:ntation of the petitioner dated 19.4.2006 vide
Pci:'ii:.ion"V'comi11g on for preliminary hearing this day, the
made ~:11e;_ foflowixagt
ORDER
.4 .mThc petitzioacrl surety is before this Court praying to issue a
of mandamus directing the respondent No.1 to we-call the order
dated 3.3.2006 at Azmcxurc-«B.
V.
W’? NO.18366t’2€iG6
2. The brief facts of the case leading to the filing of the Petition
may be stated as under.
The petitioner is working for Broadcasting Corporéfiij.o1v1jV’ofV K ” ._
Delhi Doordamhall Kendra, Gulbarga. Hcjo”fl’ofi:d«_ fifof?
loan of Rs.50,000/~ sanctioned in favour i’ospo’g§ien,t
respondent No.3/Co-opclatrivc the fi’Vo$gx)n;1:e31{‘No;4 i’a3’ied'” V
to repay the loan, the rcsp011c!~o;1t No.-3 tho’ ‘aiispotc to the
Arbitrator. dam 3.3.2005, aflowod
the application; petitioner, the borrower
respondent $9.4 1§crVhuoboh6’»LVcum surety/respondent No.5 wen:
‘R’s.S-4,876] – with intemst at the rate of
21%#’ of the amount, liberty was given to the
‘i3:$.pondo13t”‘P§o.i3i[ (ifropcmfivc Society to auctiozn their movcablc and
_ _:im;::;o$:§:ah1c’pro;:)cxV1ics. The outstamiing amount was sought to be
Awoy of attachment of salaly of the petitioner as per the
oi; fionexum-C. it is the case of the petitioner that the 5*”
‘._»;:¢sp5;ia¢nt, who is sumty cum husband of the respondent No.4 is
working at Doottiarshan Kendra, Bangalore, and he has made
anangcmont for payment of the loan by way of doduction from his
4
WP N’O.l8366/2006
salary as per the letter dated 28.12.2005 addmssettl by___ him at
Annexusre-I) and in pursuance of the 5*’! respondentis letter, of
Rs.2,500/-= yer month has been deducted out of
respondent. The 31″” respondent] Co~ope;_ati§fe vifis
dated 27.12.2005 advised the pn respotidcrgte
per month out of the salary of vtlzm petfitioiimf month
Dwember 2005 as per A1mexure–E:’ “e’Ifhe1fefo1e,* pefztitioner is
before this Court praying for reliefs azsh “111_’et1″t:~La:>_ne(i above.
3. The respondent No:3- .}j’as§* of objections
contending Oi? cannot be gxanted in the
form in whieh is E’ ..n{ is also contended that in the
absence of by respondent No.2, question
respondent No. 1 to re-cal] the order
at -3.3.2006 does not arise and the Writ Petition is
‘fig also stated that as on 30.6.2007, the 4th
_Vie,.I*e:~:}gondc:ot..i§dtie to the mspondent No.3 in a sum of Rs.42,422I~
; fot” dismissal of the Writ Petition.
” Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that since the
.aF,.a””t.1).ot1ower’s husbami cum surety is paying a sum of Rs.2,50(}[– per
month out of his salary, question of attaching the pctjtionefs saiary
xy
6
wPN{3.i8366itzo06
framed the Wait Petition. On the other hand, the petitioner has not
exhausted the rfifllfidy available before the Executing Court. In the
facts and Ci}’.’C11111StaIl(:{‘3$ of the cast, it” is for the pe£i_fix)ncr to
approach the Assistant Registrar of (3c:–opcrativc us-sck
appmpriatc relief. I see no good ground to entertain .A b
7. in the result, the Petition is i’§!)érty2
petitioner to take such course of action lénvaiiabic
Bis V ”