Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 19404 (KAR)

MURALI KRISHNA BRAHMANDAM v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/6939/2022 · 2025-04-25

K V Aravind, N V Anjaria Cj

Public Interest Litigationbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:17168-DB WP No. 6939 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR N. V. ANJARIA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND WRIT PETITION NO. 6939 OF 2022 (LB-BMP-PIL) BETWEEN: MURALI KRISHNA BRAHMANDAM AGE 66, S/O ANJANEYULU BRAHMANDAM, OCCUPATION: FATHER OF NEW BBMP AND THE NEW WORLD, 42, LAVELLE ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MURALI KRISHMA BRAHMANDUM, PARTY-IN-PERSON- ABSENT) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA , BANGALORE - 560 001. 2. THE STATE ELECTION COMMISSION REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER, No.8, 1ST FLOOR, K.S.C.M.F BUILDING, ANNEXE, CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BENGALURU- 560 052. 3. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER, BBMP, BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, Digitally signed by AMBIKA H B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:17168-DB WP No. 6939 of 2022 N.R SQUARE, CORPORATION CIRCLE, BANGALORE - 560 002. …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and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA) This is the public interest litigation. The petitioner-party-in- person has made two prayers, first to direct the respondents not to conduct elections of the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) Council, but to conduct direct election to directly elect Mayors for the whole BBMP area. The second prayer is peculiar in - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:17168-DB WP No. 6939 of 2022 itself. The petitioner-party-in-person prays that all the respondents and political parties may be directed to come together and ask the petitioner to act as the interim Mayor of the BBMP. 2. This petition has been listed from time to time, at least nine times. On all the occasions, the petitioner-party-in-person was not present and his presence was wanted, leading to adjournment of the petition at every occasion. 3. On the last date, that is on 22.11.2024, the following order was passed by the Court, "This petition came on Board from time to time awaiting the presence of the petitioner in vain as the petitioner appears in capacity of party-in-person. 2. On 22.10.2024, this Court passed the following order, "The petitioner-party-in-person was absent both in the first half as well as in the second session. Instead of dismissing the petition for want of prosecution, in the larger interest of justice, stand over to 22.11.2024." 3. When the petition came on Board today, the petitioner- party-in-person was not present. 4. The order sheet shows that the petitioner-party-in- person remained absent even as back as on 01.04.2022 when the petition was posted and the petition was adjourned. The petition is two years old, but has not been proceeded in view of the above - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:17168-DB WP No. 6939 of 2022 circumstance of absence of the party-in-person. 5. As a last opportunity, stand over to 16.12.2024." 4. When the petition came up for consideration today, the same position is obtained. The petitioner-party-in-person is not present. The only inference is that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the petition on merits. 5. Accordingly, the petition stands dismissed for want of prosecution. Sd/- (N. V. ANJARIA) CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE BK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 51