1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGAMBRE
DATED mls; T1113 3*" DAY or AUGUST 2g;:é;>&j %
BEFORE:
THE H()N'BLE MR, JUSTICE ;
WRIT PETITIGN No.2i_??{1 OF 2_Q;3,2csl»:3:z:§y% J %
BETWEEN:
Shri. Ramalingaswamyz V
Agai about 49 years, H - ._ 2
Sin. Lab: Shri, ' V.
ReSiding.at«vN§i.'1.,Lfils. ._
CITE C:;)l{>ny ,A'2'::.d _ '
Udajgragiii, " _ V' ~ _ V» "
Mys0t'e~57?0 019-k ,' PETITIONER
(By
:31' Polict: And
Comn_1an_d~an_1: ijeneral of Heme Guards,
é ' . VKamamkV.?.éz .Sia1t:,
" " VN{3.VlL and Annaswamy Mudaliyar R936,
" 4_ ~.LBa;:g5§Uft: ~»~ 560 001 RESPQNDENT
Shri.Shas§1ic}}2.ar S. Kamxadi? High Court Gmmmmenl
"*. }3'ieadcr)
$$=éU§£$
appcai filed by the pctiiioncr wilixin Gates
0f the rtsccipl of [he copy of the saigi'(§i'(i':::~._ A'
3. It is new 31:: ;:ré-;Vi_i'i;§.g§ncr"'S'v- T' of
disposing of the appca§ as "c>f .L!.2i,.s: §Co:.arl, {he
respondent had issursdv caifing upon
{he peiiiiunmf support of ihe
V
is {hat the dirauiiun issucd by this
Cour: Eu Adisafipust: (if and the rcspundcni without doing,
31,} calléciv-..I,:tpgI_;&.£hc pciilionar {:3 furnish the additional
~ ‘aagzis _unwm’I*a.r1§,t:d and since he was a bank oificiai
H ;_~zé}EiViv’noiie:t: having rcachcd him on 15.06.2009? and
due “Eu of we-rk maid mai reply {:3 {ha same, The
“:§s§$6ndmr:£, huwevcr, wiihuui cunsidaring the gmumis urged in
appeal mama, has issued 21 mama; dated 38.06.2099. Since:
the petitioner ciid ms! appear, the pctiiiun<:::r':~s appca} steed
rejected. It is ibis, which is sought to be chaiicngcd.
2
4. The Cuunsci for the pflliiiégnfilf~!’%{L3rli'{{3 |:}£Hfi3%}’£;§Viihaifiihc
appeal was filed under Sccii¢ti:’9_{5)(§£)~.fii’ the
Guards ACL 1962, aggigzsl tefihifiéiipgvvfiand it is a
slaluiory appeal, .;»_A-,V:a,}r3fl_sficic*;r¢:ti on merits.
The Appclla§§.Me?§:uv!.h0r§i§} the same and
pass ‘
égtving pnmccdcd to rczjcui {he
appeal ihcrcfora unjust aszd has rcsaiicd
in prcj1.§’ii’iesV~::V{g;___i}2c pciiiioner and that if the pciiiiuncr was
‘ additional documents, further opportunity
mig§1{ been granted {:3 the: pcliiiuncr.
” The: Gnvcmmtml Advmzale wuuid rcadiiy pain: uul
in {arms :3? Annezxurts W EL this Couri had gr:-xnicci {hrec
gimunths iimc: in dispcsc 91’ {he appcai- Tfic pciiiiunezr 111:1 having
szumpiied with {he mama, cmuid 1105. have uumpciitxi {he
2%
rcspondcni to await the p:”i:1..«\{»
in issut: yet another notice cailing i;p<3r;_A't4I?2t_'; 1$c:£i'i§.§)r1cf'£(.;»..pi;L2§»ide '
such malaria}, it was the dufggk of 111:3 'pgj:iii§unc;::"'iqigirggvicie
malarial.
6. Given the :v’;*_X}JpuIIala Auihoriiy
has merely nun–:«.:ppt:arancc cf
the 4Appcila1c Authority to
while {he pclitiuncr is also
duly is: to prtxiucc any maicziais
1&3 rc3p<m"(iA- ..i'o;*£hwiih, when there is a notice issued to the
'ihf; Appeilaicz Autimriiy.
it can be Said that {he peiitiunvr is nui
.Aabs0§.%i=:§ ti’ the responsibiiily in not having fcspondcd £0 aha
issued by [he Appcilaiw Auiheriiy. The puiiiiuncr is
” Wherefore directed Ev pmduce the ducumttnis suughi fix” by [ha
Appcsiiait: Aztilwrity on or bcfurc 17.08.2809 and ihcrcsaficr {hrs
§
Appclialc Authority shall consider Lb: appeal
dcptznding upun {he discretion of £h;:mAppcl}a’£e’ a:a:ii(}” .
the petitioner requfiring to be heaId;~:.£hc:’_é;pi2e2£E’.n1a§’bfiu
of on meriis in aucurdancc w’;£h §a.xv.
The petition is tizgfeihrefi ‘ihe abuvc teams.
Anncx_Lm–: –‘*~D is; qua§;iacd, ufi;’:::’a}’§0Ildt7Hi is dirccicd to
consider , such maicriai {hat the
pciiliomar may * A. _ ’73.
Sd/~.’
….. Judge