Sri P Munivenkatappa S/O … vs The Special Deputy Commissioner … on 28 August, 2009

IN THE r~::eH scum" 0? KARNATAKA AT Bfi.§$I:GA4i';O;'§7'E  '

EIATED T1»-as THE 237" DAY;OF,A4UGU§if',".?}i¥,Cf§""   

BEFOREA     _ _ _
ma HON'8LE MR. Jus?2Ca§s.N[:~zA¥sAMc§%iAv:~ggas?

   

w.P.No.173?o-s71i2§63[_K;;§-RR4s§1§ 

BETWEEN: _
1. P.MUN¥VENK.5¥TAPP£;; % 

Sf'-3 PER£}M}AH  .   *   
mm ABOUT 9:3;\%%E:s;;Fzs<_;  "   A
RKA NA¥AN;¢;PEA.3§4E7*r*yr=.a;;.YA 

asseua Hpm,  ; 'A  " 
sANGALoR&'J+s:3uTr§1'A%Lu.:<  
EANGALGRE   j    

2. K.DEVfi.£3AS  X . 
sis LATE SR-f..P,'PLAVERA_P'PA
:56 Ei} 'ABOUT 48 YEARS
Ra'A_N'AYANAPPASHEI7¥"{PALYA

  V'  seem $4032;
 BAN'€3iAL,GF%E~SGU_TH mwx

' -mxrgcggxggag. 

.PE'¥'§TiONERS

  L' {ay éfi y.*'Rgw'és:~; saw FOR Ci-EALAPATE-§Y A3373;

  

 Wk -1--,' THE spasm. DEPUTY comszsszomea
* %  BANGALGRE 9:371'-23¢"?
" BANGALQRE.

C;9\v\/'I

 



shew that the report of the Tahsfidar was fu;fri§shefd ':.L:f¢A fie
petifioners to have their say in the rn_a.tt:e,r_.4 !:1_'t}V1"év"4¥:i:a?€;:,£§:§s:§a'_rpcés.é'V
the petitioners did not had a fair oppoffunfiy 'io'i'prés.er:t fhe§r 

before the firs: resgondent.

For the reasons  ab-§2§e,_ ~--fg:;!.I:A£;}as*i{jg:
Writ pe;i:ic:3,é?s Vhefgby giiéwéé; V  ' 
The€3§1;3€§i'g;5§d:"'2*d§':?':'£;i5;§;.f§:§g;£':.7%]: 112903 in RRT{2)CR-
  the&flrespondeTnt --- Special
:?Z.?e;:i§L:'.tyVC%'>jVrVVr;iV§ 1'?ifi;~'.:$'it*s:3V;e:':'hereby quashed.
iii} _ Tha%L£:€fatter ré¢:}§a't*$ed to the fizst respondent for

§ff§ $hVV_dis;’>{5$a5v«.§n«accordance with Saw after providing

A ” ” ._ agj <3-;)»Vp§ifit;r1ity $0 the petitéoners.

" iii} Ifiltiésggténfiéns are Eeft open'

sd/1; \
3UDGE