High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri Uday Gangadhar Nair vs The Secretary Urban Development … on 28 July, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Sri Uday Gangadhar Nair vs The Secretary Urban Development … on 28 July, 2009
Author: Mohan Shantanagoudar
i
IN THE HIGH COURT OF i{ARNA'FAI{A
CIRCUYI' BENC'-if EAT DHARWAI)

DATED THIS THE 23%! DAY ore' JULY,      _

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MRJUSTICE 

w.r-mos. "  '
1473412007, 146:.4z--3oo7,*-14345;'   
AND 1435012997 (LB-EL,l_§'j-' 

IN w. P. 1\:o.1473§ 05'.    n V 

imfli

SR} UDAY' C-A;'1lGAEZ*H.AR~ MIR '
s/0 GANG.Anw§R iwR_ % %

AGED ABQUT .35   ' 

R/AT WARD.NO;£29"'~ ' J  '

HALIYAL, IZANDELI  

NOF{ft'i~LKARPéz'1TAI{A (I3IS'I'REC'l'}

 A '  %%%%%  ...PE'I'I'I'IONI3R

 % {:BS'~.$RIV,VKgSfIA$HIKIRAN SHE2'l"I'Y,Ai1)V.,)

A Ar§1:a~: 

 1.  .'l"§4§E.V§ECRE'FARY

'URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPAMMENT
*  GGVERNMENT 01? KARNATAKA
 VIKAS swnm
BANGALORE-56{}001

   THE UNDER SECRETARY

URBAN DEVELQFMENT BEPARVMENT
GOVERNMENT OF i{AR¥~IATAKA



AND

1. THE SECRETARY 
URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT  
GOVERNMENT 01:' KARNATAKA
VIKAS sounm   
BANG~ALORE«-560001 A

2. THE UNDER SECRETARY    . A
URBAN DEVELOPMEN'F.'_I3--EPAR'P-MENT E' .,
GOVERNMENT OF KARNATIEKA V 
VIKAS SOUDHA  
BANGALORE-560100 I

3. THE DEPUTY con1mE:'s$Ici'i~eER..:     
BAND-ELI   _  
NORTH_KA}31'{ATI~?LKA 1:)1=s'rR:«c%:'_ V' _ 

4. THE commsgszoman 1
e3frA'.rE EL'Ec:rI'oTN'-r,G--MMIsa:oN
CU.NN.INGHAN_i~ R'O;1__\B. , 
BANGALORE " , .-- V 

 * .   ' ...RESPONDEN'I'S

 -  % (BY':_:S_i§I?!_>,..EAV:I2.K. HXI°TE~,------§«iCGP FOR R1 AND R3 AND
Essa; I~LN'.PiiAFI1NDRA FOR R2 AND R4, ADV.,)

.  ¢'I"'HI'S_ PETETION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227"OF  EJONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH
IMPIJGISEEDV NOTIFICATION (CORRIGENDUM) ILYI'. 3.9.2007 IN
RESPECT.' OF WARD NO. 13 ISSUEQ BY R2 RESERVING THE

'~." "--._VV"'SEAT TOWARD 140.13 FOR acme; av smmm GENERAL
..ff(}ATEGORY T0 warm NO.13 VIDE ANN-A Amt) E'I'C.,

E   iarki. rm. 14514 OF 2007



 "SR1 R.K.LAKSHMINARAYANA
s/0 Y.R.KRISiiNAPPA

AGED ABOUT' 42 YEARS
RESIDING AT NAGARESHWARA TEMPLE STREET



ANEKAL

BANGALORE URBAN {JISTRICT

 *  122:3" F;-THE con' ~

 E9; 1,

898-3

(BY SR1 A. NAGARMAPPA, ADV.,)

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA  ._

REPRESENTED BY I'FSVS_T?4CRETA_RY  . 3
DEPARTMENT or URBAN 'E_EvELo1_>m:ENT   "
KARNATAKA GOVERNMENT SECRET-ARiA'T 
M.S.BUILDING      
BANGALORE-560901

THE STATE Enscrriori (5.-- ()V!,:9:bi¥i\d§.--.'_'$2:x+--'.»)IVI'*5bb__'.V--~
REPRESENTED B"fFfS.'COMh5lS.SIQ1€"ER

No.3, 1<.s;'.~::.TE,;_E. F. qBu:LE'1N<} *  .. 
   

BflNG5i,I3¥€E.:"" _     E
(B? SR! R.--K."H)ATF!, '§£,c:~;';P FOR R1 AND
SRI'K.flN;f?§iPw_iIP¥DR1§.»E.FOR R2, ADV.,)

"*r1«:.3.s 1$E'rz'_ifit3N is FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 Am)
(mom on INDIA PRAYING T0 QUASH

 

 1. .1

NQTIEIGATIO-E: VIBE ANNEX-C, ISSUED BY RESPONDENT

T AS WARD No.15 me’ THE TOWN MUNICWAL

CC!}NCH¢} CHANCKNG THE RESERVATION FROM

TO ‘BC-it CATEGORY BY WAY OF A CORRIGENDUM

BY THE 137 RESPCINDEKT ANQ ETC»,
%w.P} 14345 01*’ zoo?

& E:.«’,;9;E*E”£§§EEN:

S/0 DEVENDRAPPA CHANDAVARE

AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS

F’I3:’l’I.’AI.’_l’_’§¥§i’:’I*h.’§jl2E.A4V

RESPONDENTS

OCC: BUSINESS
R/0 RAJIV GANDHI NAGAR

GADAG, mgr: GADAG ‘V
1>E1f;*r:–m;§a1_a;R: 1,__ ‘

(BY M/S JAYKUMAR s. PATEL AssocIATE_E:,A:;v$.g)T’ ‘ ”

AND

1. S’l’A’I’E OF KARNATAKA, ” ‘
DEPARTMENT OF URB2\_N”-EJEVELGFMEHT
BYITSSECRETARY
M.S.BU1LDING
BANGALORE-560091

BY rrs commssrorsafa – _
BANGAIgG§~’;E” _’– € – ‘

2. STATE ELECTION doM§;i:é§s5Io:§’

3. i3EPL”ri?’%Cr.>zqiM§s$io–nER
Gama V’

4. _GAf)}XGr ~: 3E’;’EG_E’Ri”
_; MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
A mars COMM’-SSIONER

(3? s;21%.:§*;s{.%’%Vx{iArrrI, HGGP FOR R1 AND R3 AND
srei:_y.:.;~a A’¥’§jIé.Jt§Ivi1?$DRA ma R2, ADV.,)

THIS PEPTTION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 as
227 ()F'(30NS’I’l’I’UI(}N OF INDIA PRAYXNG TO QUASH THE

” » . NO'”l”IFIC4§TI0N VIBE ANN-v-C EYI’.3.9.2007, PASSED BY THE RI

{:3 3&9. Ng._;435o or goo?

“gmwsgn:

1. CHANNABASAPPA @ AJJAPPA
&GED ABOUT 38 YEAR?»

WARD NOS. 32 AND 55 012′ REsPQé§i}j§;R1§- mi;-4

CORPORATION AND _E’i’C.,

THESE PETFTIONS coM11~it;*QN’««. mR –_ r+fU’iéTH’..=3R

ORDERS THiS DAY, THE COURT M4A13;1a’;*HE3.F(>1,Lov.iI:s:(};+i_j

Since the pfirfiuant to the
impugned notifipa:1tin»ns§_V.;&I:T1_ have become
infiuctuous. are dismissed as
having V

sa/-I
iunsg