V.B. Purashappanavar vs N.W.K.R.T.C
2022 Latest Caselaw 1576 Kant

                              :1:


             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                     DHARWAD BENCH

        DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022

                             BEFORE

            THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ

          WRIT PETITION NO.105590 OF 2018 (S-R)

BETWEEN:

     V.B. PURASHAPPANAVAR
     AGE.63 YEARS
     OCC. RTD. CONTROLLER
     R/O:HUDCO COLONY
     H.NO.MIH 169
     OPPOSITE TO "NISARGA"
     MULGUND ROAD
     GADAG.

                                               ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI DINESH M KULKARNI, ADVOCATE)

AND :

1.    N.W.K.R.T.C.,
      CENTRAL OFFICE, GOKUL ROAD
      HUBBALLI
      DIST. DHARWAD
      REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.

2.    THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER
      N.W.K.R.T.C.
      GADAG DIVISION
      GADAG.

                                              ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI SHIVAKUMAR S. BADAWADAGI, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
 R2 - SERVED)
                               :2:

     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE
RESPONDENTS NO.2 TO CONSIDER AND PASS APPROPRIATE ORDERS
ON   THE    REPRESENTATIONS     SUBMITTED   BY    PETITIONER
DATED:07.03.2017 AND 03.11.2017 VIDE ANNEXURES-H & J AND
REPRESENTATION DATED:15.05.2018 ANNEXURE-"G".

    THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINAR HEARING 'B'
GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                            ORDER

The petitioner has sought for a writ in the nature of

mandamus to direct the respondents to consider and pass

appropriate orders on the representations submitted by him on

07.03.2017, 03.11.2017 and 15.05.2018. Apparently the relief

sought for by the petitioner is based upon the judgment of Co-

ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P. Nos.67313-67329 of 2011

connected with W.P. No.66136 of 2011.

2. It is stated at the bar that the respondents have

challenged the order of the learned Single Judge in the aforesaid

writ petitions before the Division Bench in W.A. No.100195 of

2015 and that the order of the learned Single Judge was

modified in terms of the order dated 23.07.2019.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

the order of the Division Bench in W.A. No.100195 of 2015 is

now challenged before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the same

is pending consideration.

4. In that view of the matter, until the Special Leave

Petition before the Hon'ble Supreme Court is considered and

disposed off, no orders can be passed in this writ petition.

Hence, this writ petition is dismissed.

5. However, it is open for the petitioner to renew his

request for consideration of his representations after conclusion

of the proceedings before the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

Sd/-

JUDGE

hnm