High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri N M Neelakanta vs State Of Karnataka on 8 January, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Sri N M Neelakanta vs State Of Karnataka on 8 January, 2010
Author: V.Gopalagowda And A.S.Bopanna
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT 

DATED THIS THE 3TH DAY OF' JANUA_Rfi:'-  " 

FRESENT

THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICEV' c~o;>a1,A   

AND 

'THE HOTNBLE MR;a'I.:f;'STICEfv. A.S.BC:PA;3$i§A 
A WRIT ?E'I'iTI{)1§I r¢c;;3;7js%4-/%2oo§ L(s--KA3*)

BETWEEN: '

SRINMNEEL1§i£&NT;§ A    
S/0 LATE SR: ma; MARE Gowyznx " 
AGED ABO'U'T'.__55v~YEAR_$__  " V   »

WORKXNG AS"'EI>?ECIAL_L:'€ND-ACQUIS'i"ION
()FF'ICER,. BANGA'LoRE"em53AN
BANGALORE RURAL Arm

RAMANAGARAM 'E)IS.'I'R£C'I'S

33:? FLOOR, m_DIUM' BLOCK
V§{_S:VESWARAIAHv--*F£}'WERS

 «Dr. BR AMBEDKAR BEEDBI T
'  BAN(§£§L€}i?E' -_ 560 cm  PETFFISNER

* .{a¥ S:R1« ?}_F§T1'JADHAV 85 SEE P PRASANNA KUMAR, wvs.)

 AA ANI5  1

   STATE 01? KARNATAKA

REP. BY ITS SECRETARY
REVENUE DEPARTMENT
M.S. BUILBENG

Dr. B R AMBEDKA BEEDHI

BANGALORE --- 86 I
»1-'.'''



2 UNDER SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT ,  
REVENUE DEPARTMENT 
MS. BUILDING
Dr. B R AMBEDKAR BEEDHI
BANGALORE -- 560 001   

3 SR} N CHANDRASI-EEKAR  ._ '- , - _ .
FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN 'F0 THE--1 A . ,
PETFPIONER  " 7 ~ 1   
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, *  * -- -' 
WORKING AS HOUSE r2.1~";_m*_ €ONTRGLLE};2'
BANGALORE SOUTH "Zena .__ _  
3RD FLOOR, POBEUTM BLOCK   '

VISVESWARAIAH 'i-'QVJERS  ' "
Dr. B R AMBEL)KAIe..BEE.sH: . 
BANGALQRE -560     RESPONDENTS

(BY SR1 :-13"VfpE§2Afi?A';--5-GA)...   V

 'r'I-11's»s:JR:Tv":VPE'If1':?1t)N IS FILE!) UNDER ARTICLE 226
as 22.7 '>'i?.'I'HE-.,AG0NwST"ITUTION 09' £ND§A PRAYING TO
QUASE-I THE VORQER 18.12.09 PASSED BY THE
I{ARNA'£'AKz*\ A;:3eMi:~;1m'rf2.AT:vE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE IN
APPLICATEON  &;99"7*/2009 THEREBY RI3..5'Ec'r:NG THE
PRAYER FORAN INTERIM ORDER BY ITS ORDER rm}

 *  _ 1.'_3_'.°12_..o9 .3 PER 'AN--r:'E'.x-A; E'E'C.,

 " VA  T.  ~i§c§f."ition earning 93:1 for Preliminary hearing
~. fiilais d'ajt';»._B€}PAKNA (1., made the following :

ORDER

Sri B. Veerappa, harmed Government Advocate to

‘fiaccept notice for respondents No. 1 and 2 and file memo of

appearance Within a period of fear Weeks fmm today.

ii…

Considering the nature of disposal, notice

No.3 is mmecessary.

2. The petitioner is qt.1:*i’stiu:’.):zi1′–VVfJr;£’:V’ gA):r£:’?.t:ic;g-§’VV’1ah;:b and fixed the next
heating léitgcé saTi’L§”_c1;é1eVVhas also elapsed and the
ma£t¢ris by the Tribunal, we see
no masott: ”

the:: dismissed with no

orjrirgr as

Sd/Q;

Iudgéé

S5/§
Iudg3

If (, _ L 4″ LV41..%hrp§bms