Sri. R.K. Appa vs Union Of India
2023 Latest Caselaw 495 Kant

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

     DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JANUARY 2023

                      PRESENT

       THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
                       AND
        THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT

         R.P.No.492/2019 in W.A.No.430/2016

BETWEEN:

SRI. R.K. APPA
S/O. LATE YARALAKKAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
VITTALAPURA,
CHIKKADALVATTA POST,
MADHUGIRI TALUK,
TUMKUR DISTRICT-572127.
                                         ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI SAGAR B B, ADV.)

AND:

1.     UNION OF INDIA
       REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
       MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS,
       M.H.A. NORTH BLOCK,
       NEW DELHI-110001.

2.     THE DIRECTOR GENERAL
       CENTRAL RESERVE POLICE FORCE,
       CGO COMPLEX, LODHI ROAD,
       NEW DELHI-110003.

3.     THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE
       SOUTHERN SECTOR,
                               2


     CENTRAL RESERVE POLICE FORCE,
     ROAD NO.10C,
     NEAR MLA/MP COLONY,
     JUBILEE HILLS,
     HYDERABAD-500033,
     TELANGANA STATE.

4.   THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE
     CENTRAL RESERVE POLICE FORCE,
     GROUP CENTRE, YELAHANKA,
     BENGALURU-560064.

5.   THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE
     CENTRAL RESERVE POLICE FORCE,
     RANGE HEAD QUARTERS,
     YELAHANKA,
     BENGALURU-560064.

6.   THE COMMANDANT
     77 BATTALION, CRPF,
     POONAMALLEE, CHENNAI-56,
     TAMIL NADU.
                                            ...RESPONDENTS

     THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47
RULE 1 R/W SECTION 114 OF CPC, PRAYING THIS COURT
TO REVIEW THE ORDER DATED 15.04.2019 PASSED IN
WRIT APPEAL NO.430/2016 (S-RES), ON THE FILE OF THE
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU.

    THIS REVIEW PETITION IS COMING ON FOR
ORDERS THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J, PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:

                          ORDER

Heard Mr.Sagar B.B., learned counsel for the

petitioner, on the question of admission.

This petition has been filed seeking review of the

judgment dated 15.04.2019 passed a Division Bench of this

Court in W.A.No.430/2016.

2. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, in

our considered opinion the judgment neither suffers from

any jurisdictional infirmity nor any error apparent on the

face of the record warranting interference of this Court in

exercise of review jurisdiction.

In the result, the petition fails and is hereby

dismissed.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

mpk/-* CT:bms