Sri V Govinda Raju vs The State Of Karnataka on 24 July, 2013

[Cites 2, Cited by 1]

Karnataka High Court

Sri V Govinda Raju vs The State Of Karnataka on 24 July, 2013

Bench: L. Narayana Swamy

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

            DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JULY 2013

                             BEFORE

        THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. NARAYANA SWAMY

         WRIT PETITION NO.32240 OF 2013 (S, TR)

Between:

Sri V. Govinda Raju
S/o S.A. Venkataramanaraju
Aged about 59 years
Superintending Engineer (Electrical)
Office of Chief Engineer (Electrical)
Transmission Zone
Bangalore
                                                   ...Petitioner
(by Shri K.H. Somashekhar, Advocate)

And:

   1. The State of Karnataka
      Represented by its
      Principal Secretary Energy
      Vidhana Soudha
      Bangalore - 1

   2. The Managing Director
      Karnataka Power Transmission
      Corporation Limited (KPTCL)
      Kaveri Bhavan
      Bangalore - 560 009

   3. The Director (Admn. & HRD)
                                  2




      Karnataka Power Transmission
      Corporation Limited (KPTCL)
      Kaveri Bhavan
      Bangalore - 560 009

   4. Sri P.N. Nagaraj
      S/o not known
      Aged about 48 years
      Superintending Engineer (Electrical)
      HESCOM (Administration)
      Bagalkote 587 101
                                                     ...Respondents
(by Shri V.Y. Kumar, Advocate for R2 and 3;
 Sri N.B. Vishwanath, AGA for R1)

      This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India praying to quash the order dated 10.7.13
issued by the R3 insofar as the petitioner's transfer is concerned
transferring the petitioner from KPTCL, Transmission Zonal
Office, Bangalore to HESCOM, Hubli, vide Annexure-A; and etc.

      This petition coming on for preliminary hearing, this day,
the Court made the following:

                            ORDER

With the consent of the learned counsel appearing of the parties, this petition is taken up for final hearing and disposed of by this order.

2. Since the petitioner prays for a direction to the respondents to dispose of the representation dated 15th July 3 2013 Annexure-B given by the petitioner, the petition stands disposed of directing the respondent No.2 and 3 to consider and pass appropriate orders on the representation of the petitioner within a period of two weeks from today.

Sd/-

JUDGE lnn

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court