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

Kum. Nethravathi. G. S. vs The State Of Karnataka on 3 September, 2018

Author: A.S. Bopanna

Bench: A.S. Bopanna

                                 1



     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2018

                            PRESENT

           THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA

                                AND

     THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR


     WRIT PETITION NOS.36932 - 36934 OF 2018 (S-KSAT)

BETWEEN:

1.     Kum. Nethravathi G.S.,
       D/o. Shivaramanna G.S.,
       Aged about 35 years,
       Residing at Oriental Line,
       Police Quarters Door No.4,
       K.G.F. Kolar,

       And also permanently
       Residing at:
       Kum. Nethravathi. G.S.,
       D/o. Shivaramanna. G.S.,
       Door No. A-89, S.O.G. Colony,
       Industrial Area,
       Davanagere.

2.     Kum. Kalpana B.N.
       D/o. Ningappa,
       Aged about 41 years,
       Residing at
       D.A.R.Police Quarters,
       Champion Riffs,
       K.G.F. Kolar.
                                  2



       And also, permanently
       Residing at:
       Kum. Kalpana.B.N.,
       D/o. Ningappa,
       Residing at Karahalli,
       Karahalli Village,
       Bangarapete Taluk,
       Kolar District.

3.     Lohit Kumar.K.O.,
       S/o. Omkarappa,
       Aged about 26 years,
       Residing at
       D.A.R. Police Quarters,
       Door No.54,
       Champion Riffs.,
       K.G.F.Kolar.

       And also permanently
       Residing at:
       Lohit Kumar K.O.,
       S/o. Omkarappa,
       Residing at Karahalli,
       Karahalli Village,
       Bangarapete Taluk,
       Kolar District.
                                           ... Petitioners
(By Sri. Sateesh M. Doddamani, Advocate)

AND:

1.   The State of Karnataka,
     Rep. by its Secretary,
     Home Department,
     M.S.Building,
     Bengaluru-560001.

2.   The Director General &
     Inspector General of Police,
                                3



     Karnataka State,
     No.2, Nrupathunga Road,
     Bengaluru-560001.

3.   The Superintendent of Police,
     K.G.F. Area, Kolar District,
     Kolar-563115.

4.   The Superintendent of Police &
     Chairman Recruitment Committee for
     Backlog Vacancies,
     District Police Office,
     K.G.F., Kolar District-563115.
                                               ... Respondents
(By Sri. I.Tharanath Poojary, AGA )

       These Writ Petitions are filed under Articles 226 and 227
of the Constitution of India praying to quash the impugned order
dated 16.08.2018 passed in application 6365-6367/2018 vide
Annexure B only in so far denial of grant of interim order as
prayed for in application No.6365-6367/2018.

     These Writ Petitions coming on for orders, this day,
A.S.Bopanna J., made the following:

                            ORDER

The petitioners are before this court assailing the order dated 16.08.2018 passed by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal (for short 'KSAT') in Application No.6365-6367/2018. The petitioners claiming to be aggrieved by the order impugned before the KSAT dated 16.07.2018 (Annexure 'A-8') are assailing 4 the same. In the application filed by the petitioners they had also sought for the interim prayer.

2. The KSAT through its order dated 16.08.2018 while directing notice to the respondents therein has not considered the grant of ad-interim order, but has observed that the interim relief cannot be granted without reply statement from the respondents. If that be the position no decision has been taken by the KSAT on the interim prayer. Be that as it may, the learned counsel for the petitioner would seek to contend that in the circumstance they have been discharged for the fault of the respondents herein, the petitioners ought not to have been penalized. On this aspect certainly it is a matter for consideration before the KSAT and at this stage it would not be proper for us to entertain this petition.

3. It is the further contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that they are likely to be evicted from the quarters which they are in occupation and to that extent interim protection be granted. Even on this aspect we are of the opinion that it is still open for the KSAT to consider this aspect also if 5 such request is made before it. In that view at this stage this petition is premature.

Accordingly the petitions stands disposed of.

Sd/-

JUDGE sd/-

JUDGE sd