Karnataka High Court
Venkate Gowda vs State Of Karnataka on 11 July, 2014
Bench: N.Kumar, B.Sreenivase Gowda
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
Dated this the 11th day of July, 2014
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.KUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.SREENIVASE GOWDA
R.P.NO. 250 OF 2011
In
WP No.23682 of 2009
BETWEEN
VENKATE GOWDA
S/O LATE VENKATE GOWDA
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
ASSISTANT ENGINEER
NOW WORKING IN K.P.M. SUB DIVISION
CAUVERY NEERAVARI NIGAMA LTD.,
CHANNAPATNA,
RAMANAGARA DISTRICT ...PETITIONER
(By Sri S V NARASIMHAN, ADVOCATE)
AND
2
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
VIKASA SOUDHA
BANGALORE
2. KARNATAKA STATE PUBLIC SERVICE
COMMISSION
UDYOGA SOUDHA
RESIDENCY PARK ROAD
BANGALORE 1
BY ITS SECRETARY
3. B N KESHAVA PRASAD
ASSISTANT ENGINEER WRD
R/AT NO.161, 4TH MAIN
BCC LAYOUT
NEAR CHANDRA LAYOUT
WATER TANK
BANGALORE 40
4. K K RAGHUPATHI
ASSISTANT ENGINEER WRD
R/AT NO.943, "LAKSHMI NILAYA",
B M ROAD
PERIYAPATNA
MSYORE DISTRICT 571 107
5 GOKUL DAS
ASSISTANT ENGINEER WRD
PRESENTLY WORKING NO.C-3 KNNL
MI SUB DIVSIION, NO.5
HIREKUMBI SAVADATTI TALUK
BELGAUM DISTRICT 591 110
6. ESHWARAPPA
ASSISTANT ENGINEER WRD
R/AT HARTHY MAGADI TALUK,
2
3
BANGALORE
RURAL DISTRICT 562 120
7. G C JAGADEESHA
ASSISTANT ENGINEER WRD
OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE
ENGINEER, NO.2 SUB DIVISON,
MARKETING DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
BATAVADI APMC
TUMKUR
8. H.M.T SWAMY
S/O MALLIKARJUNAIAH K
ASSISTANT ENGINEER WRD
R/AT NO.856, 37TH F CROSS,
20 TH MAIN, 4TH T BLOCK,
JAYANAGAR
BANGALORE 11 ...RESPONDENTS
(By Sri D. Ashwathappa HCGP for R1 and R2;
R3, 6, 7 and 8 served;
R4 and 5 deleted)
This Review Petition is filed under Order 47 Rule 1 of
CPC praying to review of the order dated 15-12-2010 passed
in WP No.23682/2009, on the file of the Hon'ble High Court
of Karnataka, Bangalore.
This Review Petition coming on for orders this day,
N KUMAR J., made the following:
ORDER
The review petitioner was the petitioner in W.P. No. 23682/2009. The said Writ Petition was heard along with 3 4 other connected matters and the same was decided by a common order dated 15.12.2010. The Application filed by the review petitioner herein came to be dismissed by the Tribunal and the Writ Petition filed against the said order also came to be dismissed by virtue of the common order passed in the batch of Writ Petitions, though several benefits were granted. The grievance of the review petitioner is that, he is entitled to those benefits but is not granted to him.
2. From a reading of the order we find that his case is not considered in this batch of Writ Petitions. Therefore, the appropriate course is, to recall the order dismissing his Writ Petition and list this Writ Petition for hearing separately so that the question whether this judgment would enure to his benefit or not could be gone into and appropriate orders are passed. Hence, we pass the following order: -
(i) The review petition is allowed.
(ii) The order dated 15.12.2010 dismissing W.P. No. 23682/2009 is recalled and the said Writ 4 5 Petition be listed for hearing according to the roaster before the appropriate Bench.
Sd/-
JUDGE Sd/-
JUDGE ckl/-
5