Karnataka High Court
Shivayogi S/O Arjun Nedalagi vs The State Of Karnataka And Ors on 9 December, 2022
Author: Mohammad Nawaz
Bench: Mohammad Nawaz
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ
WRIT PETITION No.203207/2022
BETWEEN
SHIVAYOGI
S/O ARJUN NEDALAGI
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
OCC: BUSINESS/ZP MEMBER,
R/O. SALOTAGI,
TQ. INDI,
DIST. VIJAYAPURA-586101. ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. S.S. MAMADAPUR, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF HOME,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BENGALURU-01.
2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
DIST. VIJAYAPURA-586 201.
3. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
TQ: INDI,
DIST: VIJAYAPURA-586 101.
4. THE CIRCLE POLICE INSPECTOR
INDI POLICE STATION,
TQ: INDI,
DIST. VIJAYAPURA-586 101. ...RESPONDENTS
2
(BY SRI. VEERANAGOUDA M. BIRADAR, AGA
FOR R1 TO R4)
THIS WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF
MANDAMUS OR ORDER OR ANY OTHER DIRECTION IN THE
NATURE OF A WRIT DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO
CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATIONS OF THE PETITIONER AS PER
ANNEXURES- A TO C IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND
EQUITY.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Learned AGA is directed to take notice for respondent Nos.1 to 4.
2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the inclusion of his name in the list of rowdy sheeters. It is contended by the learned counsel for petitioner that the petitioner has never indulged in illegal activities and he has never taken the law into his hands and therefore the inclusion of his name in the list of rowdy sheeters has prejudiced his reputation. It is submitted that representations as per Annexures-A to C have been given to respondent Nos.2 to 4 but they are not responding.
3
3. The petitioner has not placed any material to show that his name has been included in the list of rowdy sheeters. However, he has furnished copies of representations given to respondent No.2 to 4 as per Annexures - A to C. The petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that his representations are not considered by the said respondents.
4. This Court in W.P. No.202825/2022 disposed on 15.11.2022 after relying on an order passed in W.P. No.4504/2021 dated 22.04.2022, wherein it is held that 'the jurisdictional police shall compulsorily once in two years undertake a periodic review of entries in the Register of Rowdies Suo motu, as provided under Clause (2) Order 1057 of the Manual and that representation given by the delinquent for review shall be considered by the jurisdictional police at the initial level within a period of 30 days during which necessary inputs may be obtained through available sources as to the merits of the claim and a recommendation shall be sent to the jurisdictional 4 Superintendent of Police or the Sub-Divisional Police Officer within fifteen days along with the representation and material collected thereon, such recommendation along with result of the consideration of the representation shall be communicated to the delinquent concerned within the next fifteen days', has granted liberty to the petitioner to file necessary representation and directed the Police authorities to consider the same and pass necessary orders.
5. In the light of the order passed by this Court in the above noted writ petition, and also in view of the representations already submitted by the petitioner as per Annexures-A to C, the respondent Nos.2 to 4 are directed to consider the same and pass necessary orders following the procedure prescribed.
Writ Petition stands disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE HB/-