Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 14299 (KAR)

SRI. K. CHAMPALAL v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/13646/2017 · 2025-01-22

Jyoti Mulimani

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:2722 WP No. 13646 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 13646 OF 2017 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. K.CHAMPALAL S/O. LATE KANYALAL, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, 2. SRI. ARVIND KUMAR S/O. J. MITTALAL, AGED ABOUT --YEARS, 3. SRI. ANAND S/O. LATE G.GISSULAL, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, 4. SRI. S.ANBARASAN S/O. P.S.SINGARAVELU, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, 5. SRI. S.RAKESH KUMAR S/O. SHANTILAL, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, 6. SRI. S.MANOJ KUMAR S/O. B.SHANTHILAL, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, 7. SRI. RAJENDRA KUMAR S/O. LATE SOHANLAL, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, 8. SRI. SATISH S/O. LATE KUMARPAL, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, Digitally signed by THEJASKUMAR N Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:2722 WP No. 13646 of 2017 9. SRI. G. UDAYCHAND JAIN S/O. LATE G. GISOOLAL, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, 10. SRI. B.PRAKASH CHAND S/O. BABOOTHMULL, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, 11. SMT. LEELA BAI W/O. LATE R.M.SHANTHILAL NAHAR, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, 12. SMT. NANDA DEVI S/O. M. SOHANLAL, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, THE PETITIONERS 1 TO 12 ARE THE BUSINESSMEN AT B.M.ROAD, (AVENUE ROAD), ROBERTSONPET, KOLAR GOLD FIELDS, KOLAR DISTRICT-563 101. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. T.SESHAGIRI RAO., ADVOCATE [ABSENT]) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, VIKASA SOUDHA, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE-560 001. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, KOLAR DISTRICT, KOLAR-563 101. 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PWD DEPARTMENT, KOLAR-563 101. …RESPONDENTS - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:2722 WP No. 13646 of 2017 (BY SRI.MANJUNATHA RAYAPPA., AGA) 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 Though matter called twice, the petitioners are not represented. When the case is listed and called out, the advocate must be present. The absence may affect the case. Sri.Manjunatha Rayappa., AGA for respondents 1 to 3 has appeared in person As could be seen from the Writ papers, the petition is filed in the year 2017. Now we are in the month of January 2025. The petition is pending from eight years. As already noted above, though matter called twice, the petitioners are not represented. It appears that the petitioners are not interested in prosecuting the petition. Hence, the Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE TKN List No.: 2 Sl No.: 39.1