SRI. MAHENDRA H. MUNDAWAD v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
WP/103618/2017 · 2025-02-07
M Nagaprasanna
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 5156 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 5156 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:2408 WP No. 103618 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
WRIT PETITION NO. 103618 OF 2017 (GM-TEN)
BETWEEN:
SRI. MAHENDRA H. MUNDAWAD, AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: D. NO.1717, ARVIND NAGAR, NEAR NETAJI SCHOOL, HOSAPETE -583201. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. LAXMAN T. MANTAGANI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT (MINES-2) COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU.
2.
THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND CHAIRMAN OF DISTRICT SAND COMMITTEE GADAG, DIST: GADAG.
3.
THE DISTRICT SAND COMMITTEE, DIST: GADAG, BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY SENIOR GEOLOGIST (DEPT. OF MINES) DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION BUILDING ROOM NO.108, GADAG -582101.
Digitally signed by VISHAL NINGAPPA PATTIHAL Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench
- 2 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:2408 WP No. 103618 of 2017
4.
THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, GADAG, DIST: GADAG. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI SHARAD V. MAGADUM, AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA IS PRAYING TO DIRECT THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO ALLOW THE PETITIONER TO PARTICIPATE THE BID FOR ALL THE SAND BLOCKS VIDE ANNEXURE-B (EXCEPT THE RESERVED CATEGORY) PUBLISHED IN THE KARNATAKA GAZZETTE DATED:14.11.2016 IN NO.LND/ C.AADH:3592/ 2016-17 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. ISSUE ANY OTHER ORDER OR DIRECTION AS THIS HON’BLE COURT DEEMS FIT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA)
1.
Learned counsel for the petitioner files a memo submitting that the petition is rendered infructuous by efflux of time.
2. In terms of the memo so filed, petition is
disposed as having become infructuous.
Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE RHR/- List No.: 1 Sl No.: 107