Y R Manohar vs The State Of Karnataka on 6 December, 2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE SIH DAY OF DECEMBER

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICEDASHAOKIEA;

WRIT PETITION NO..2Q00':7'vO:F..2O1C--".§EXCIAS:Ej' A  %

BETWEEN

Y R MANOHAR
S/ORKKANCHAN  _ -_

AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS

CL--9 LICENSEE.   . jj -  v_ I =
NO.FF--4, GR.EENI3.RYlAP; .,Ti'MEN'.l;'f-- '. _ _
ISTH PLAINHSTREZET, .,INPANTRY jP_OAD'"'

    PETITIONER

  ADV. ,)

AND:

1 THE'«.S"I1~\TE-._OI?VKARNATAI{A
; I » I§EPRESEN''I*ED' BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
 ,PINANCE"'DEP_A.RTMENT
'VIDHANA soumm

A " ~ ._ --vSAN(:IAL=ORE--5S00o1

1" =  II'IIIEj-EV}<ICISE COMMISSIONER IN KARNATAKA

 _ VOKKALIGARA BHAVANA
.. RANI CHENNAMMA CIRCLE
BANGALORE

 - 3  THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT
BANGALORE

4 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE
BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT (EAST)
POORNIMA COMPLEX, J C ROAD
BANGALORE



2

5 INSPECTOR OF EXCISE
ULSOOR RANGE  
BANGALORE  

[R1 & R2 SERVED)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UN_DER'AI'?.TI'CLE -2,26 » _ "

AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OR ..INDrAp'RAY_INQ TO *
DIRECT THE RESPONDENT N0.03--LICI3NS!N'G_ AUTHORITY

TO SUPPLY THE COUNTERSIGNED TO’
THE PETITIONER TO REMIT L-I.CENSE,_F-EE».AI\ID THE’
ADDITIONAL LICENSE FEE vRROvIDED.LI_INDER RULE 8
AND 8–A OF KARNATAKA EXCI.SE.,_(SALE«–.OF INDIAN AND
FOREIGN I RULES AND CONSEQUENTLY TO”RE’CEIVE THE
APPLICATION FOR RENEWAL ;AN’D_”CONDSIDER THE SAME

IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW’-AND

THIS I>_E-T;I’T1ON::’COIvI1Nc.§OIs;.I§fOR’ORDERS THIS DAY,
THE COURTi_pMAi:DE THE ‘TOLLOwII~IG:'””

The leaffied petitioner has filed a
memo seeking’ 1’ejSIvevv’ Q-{Z to withdraw this
petI.tiOn. ‘memO on record. Accordingly,

thiS’ ‘p_VetItV1’O”r1V is as Withdrawn.

Sd/-

JUDGE