Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka Lokayukta And Anr vs A M Biradar S/O Late. Mabupatel Biradar ... on 23 August, 2022

Author: H.B.Prabhakara Sastry

Bench: H.B.Prabhakara Sastry

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                  KALABURAGI BENCH

     DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF AUGUST 2022
                            PRESENT
THE HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY
                      AND
     THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL B.KATTI

       WRIT PETITION No.200032/2022 (S-KAT)
BETWEEN:

1.     The Karnataka Lokayukta
       Rep. by its Registrar,
       M.S.Building, Bangalore-01.

2.     Additional Registrar of Enquiries-11
       Karnataka Lokayukta, M.S.Building,
       Bangalore.
                                                      ... Petitioners
(By Sri Subhash Mallapur, Advocate)

AND:

1.     A.M.Biradar S/o. Late. Mabupatel Biradar,
       Age: 66 years, Occ: Retd. Retired Secretary,
       Grama Panchayat, Gubbevada,
       Vijayapura District, R/o at Near Agricultural Office,
       Sindagi Taluk, Vijayapur-586128.

2.     The State of Karnataka,
       Rep: its Principle Secretary,
       Department of Rural Development and
       Panchayat Raj, Ambedkar Veedhi,
       Bangalore-560001.                          ... Respondents

      This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ in nature of
certiorari and quash the order dated 25.02.2020 passed by the
                                              W.P.No.200032/2022
                               2




Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal at Kalaburagi         in
Application 5561/2019 vide Annexure-A and etc.

      This petition coming on for orders, through physical
hearing/video conference, this day Dr.H.B.Prabhakara Sastry
J., made the following:
                            ORDER

The learned counsel for the petitioners who is physically present submits that due to the non-cooperation of the party, he couldn't comply with the office objections. Thus, he pleads his helplessness in complying with the office objections.

In the light of the above, since sufficient opportunities of not less than six times have already been granted to comply with the office objections, and the counsel for petitioner has expressed his helplessness to comply with the office objections, the petition stands dismissed for non-compliance of office objections.

Sd/-

JUDGE Sd/-

JUDGE sn