Sri Lakkappa vs State Of Karnataka on 3 November, 2010

:1:

xx may HI&H'COaRT §F.KAR§A?fiKA AT EANEALQRE
aarzm THIS max 3"'aAy'a3'MavEMa£R 233$,
PRE$£NT H .

2&3 fiQN'BES.MR.JUSTfQE V 3 sA53$a3? R

may HflN'ELE'flfiSJU§TTE£"E'V1fl$$AR$T§E§~fi~Hi

w.§.w¢.343€?(2§z$ is 33:?  "=' %"

-.--u.-u-aua-....n--.

saz LKKABPA
Sf0.KOTTURAPRA .

AGES 56 rmans- .w»_g ',g_ ;a
WDRKING.AS Avprw G3F:c$n»f=},
O/G EXECUTIVE EHGIEEER ' "W

NO.1, Pwn"D1vz§:¢g-g,T=_, .'-
BANGALonE~,*~1_ 'g.f»
gcommvuxcarzmws a aU:L3:N@sg;'.;_f<
K R czacna 2 r~ * 2
BANGALORE-560 009 V

5 c s NEGARAJU v,*,
A£€OUNT5 SUPERINTENBEfi$--_
035102 or THE ERE Eivzazfifi,
BANGALoRE-UR2AHf_ ; ;v.*4» *.
EAEGALORE-S68 091' ~"*

6 EEE Exgc$fzvE{E§G:NEER 3, 
PUELI¢[WDRKS.DEPA£TEBflT nxvzgzox
BANGLQRE¥fi5Q»G§1"x , ;:~ ... RESPQRDENTS

 ""    AGA;
THis w.§*Ei$Efi"§fibER ARTICLES 225 & 22?

GI?  CO}§S'1'I.$'(E.'I'If3N"*"'{}F INDIA PRAYENG TO CALL
E'OR4';I'HE.RECG?.1_Ij)S RELATING TO TEE IMPUQIED ORDER.

"*.§SHEE¢$, DATED' £fi;1o.201o as KAT rm AFPL.

NG,6E93!2Qi9VV1EE aNmExU§£~A PERflSED QUEER THE

 tS&HExIH 39 FAR AS THE REPQEAL 09 THE INTERIfi

CREE; as gaayin xx Knw.

 PETITIQN CQMING OH FQR FRELEMINARY

  A'  '21-as nay, V.€3v.SABH'.AI-£11', 3., mm: '.I'HZE
'2 "-TFGLLG%ING:



 

M

OREER

 

This writ petitian is filed hgfl the

applicnt befcre the Kaxnataka Admifiiéfiigtitfifi

Tribunal, baing aggrievad_ by thé* idéfiticai"'V

order passed in ApplicatiefiéNg;56G3X2§1$ §a§éd

28.16.2913, wherein, the Tribfinal*§$5»§a§3édw 

identical order 'decli#ihg ,§h# §#ag§r far
granting stay at §£$_ét$g% ¢fiEi$suing natice
ts the re3pondent§wg§g'fi§§ §ifi%éEéd that all
applicati§fi§4§:% §#@ {:  ;:m:;a: aannactad
ap§1icfi§ia§§ 5§§fiifi $§;#§%?éfi after service cf
naticéf _§éfiiti%n¢;L herein filefi application

befare'th%»Karhfitaiélfidministrativa Tribunal,

heigg" aggriefiéd fiy' the amendment to C & R

 Ru;és ydgfidg the cansequantial arder cf

fg§§§®i%ti§fi"&f the petiticnez. an applicatian

v _ for staf'ih filed alang with the petitian. In

uH" ,§1L thé applications the Learned Tribunal by

flier' dated 29.10.2019 aftar mansidaring the

'£:t:%r2.ts:2ti<m 0f the Cmmael appearing fax: the

«.partias abeezved as f¢llow$:~



an
Db
ll

"therafcre, at this Stags, we
decline to grant gtay.

List these afiplicatians _afi&, a
similar connected a§p£icacian5_§ffi@fi:3J"

service sf natiae."

Tharafara, at this stage, we_fiéfii;$§*ta5gfi&nt

stay.

2. List: the a;;:p--l.£;:a{f:~:T,_ac::15  other
similar connected°app1é,Vci'eg?tiE3si_s.V aftsr samrice

mf notice. 4;"

3. €Le§@na&'$§fii§£"Cé@fiSel appearing far
thfi pfititibfiag $$fi$i$tfid that the arder of the
raspandggt_ mayW b§% fi13rifiad permitting the

patitiQnef'fi9"§ufiéué the apglicatian far atay

.."afée£:;ger?iceVW§f natice, whigh shall be

' cén5i&é29df1ndepandent1y;

u%{ : In. viaw of the limited auhmiBai¢n

V 2fm§&e,hy the learned Sanic: Cmunasl apgaaring

 5f¢r the petitionaz and having ragard to the

u? fact that the Tribunal at the atage af iaauing

netica to the respondents faund that no stay

kw»

: 5 :

cauld be granted wiihaut hearing the

raapondanta, it i3 mpen ta the petitioné: ta

pursue his appliaation far stay g£fie§” t§3

reapondenta are served and ‘%he <n$aid_'w

appliaaticn shall he consiéétadaindagéndgnfiiy

by the Tribunal.

5. Accazdinglg, ;””‘ _ finfiar ‘H°'” thesa
observations appli§&£ién$?Vagfi :§;it petition

are éi5mis$efi,f–