Karnataka High Court
Karnataka Jogi Samaja Sudharaka Sangha vs Mangaluru Smart City Limited on 15 January, 2025
Author: Jyoti Mulimani
Bench: Jyoti Mulimani
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:1523
WP No. 1639 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI
WRIT PETITION NO. 1639 OF 2021 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
KARNATAKA JOGI SAMAJA SUDHARAKA SANGHA,
REGD, YOGESHWAR MUTT,
KADRI HILLS, MANGALURU-575 004.
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT,
SRI. K.KIRAN KUMAR JOGI,
S/O K.GANAPATHI JOGI,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
...PETITIONER
(BY SMT. ANANYA RAI., ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. VISHWAJIT RAI., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. MANGALURU SMART CITY LIMITED,
2ND FLOOR,
MANAGALURU CITY CORPORATION BLDG,
M.G.ROAD, LALBAGH,
Digitally signed by MANGALURU-575 003.
THEJASKUMAR N
Location: High
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.
Court of Karnataka
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
DAKSHINA KANNADA,
MANGALURU-575 003.
3. THE COMMISSIONER,
MANGALURU CITY CORPORATION,
M.G.ROAD, LALBAGH,
MANGALURU-575 003.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. ASHVINI PATIL., ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. AJAY.J.NANDALIKE., ADVOCATE FOR R1;
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:1523
WP No. 1639 of 2021
SRI. MANJUNATHA RAYAPPA., AGA FOR R2;
SRI. K.V.NARASIMHAN., ADVOCATE FOR R3)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN
RELIEFS.
THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS
UNDER:
ORAL ORDER
Smt.Ananya Rai., counsel on behalf of Sri.Vishwajith Rai.M., for the petitioner, Smt.Ashvini Patil., counsel on behalf of Sri.Ajay J.Nandalike., for respondent No.1 and Sri.Manjunatha Rayappa., AGA for respondent No.2 have appeared in person.
2. The captioned Writ Petition is filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider the representations dated 10.09.2020 and 24.11.2020 vide Annexures-H, J and K respectively.
3. Heard the arguments and perused the Writ papers with care.
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:1523 WP No. 1639 of 2021
4. Counsel for the petitioner submits that a mandamus may be ordered directing the respondents to consider the representations submitted by the petitioner.
Counsel for respondent No.1 submits that an appropriate order may be passed.
The oral submission made by counsel for the respective parties is placed on record.
5. The grievance of the petitioner is that, they have submitted representations in the year 2020 i.e., on 10.09.2020 and 24.11.2020 and the same have not been considered as of today. Hence, a Mandamus is ordered directing the respondents to consider the representation dated 10.09.2020 and 24.11.2020 submitted by the petitioners vide Annexures-H, J and K respectively in accordance with the law if the same are not considered as of today, within eight weeks from the receipt of certified copy of this order.
6. Resultantly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. -4-
NC: 2025:KHC:1523 WP No. 1639 of 2021 This Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
Sd/-
(JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE TKN List No.: 3 Sl No.: 43