Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 59301 (KAR)

TALEDHALLI MANJULA v. DIRECTOR OF ELECTRONIC

WP/107095/2025 · 2025-09-24

Suraj Govindaraj

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13176 WP No. 107095 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 107095 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: TALEDHALLI MANJULA AGE. 40 YEARS, R/O. 12TH WARD, KASHI SANGAMESHWAR BADAVANE, BEHIND KEB, HARAPANAHALLI-583131 DISTRICT. VIJAYANAGAR …PETITIONER (BY SRI. BHUSHAN KULKARNI., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. DIRECTORATE OF ELECTRONIC DELIVERY OF CITIZEN SERVICES R/BY ITS DIRECTOR, OFFICE AT INFANTRY ROAD, SHIVAJI NAGAR, BENGALURU-560001 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, VIJAYANAGAR DISTRICT, TB DAM ROAD, VIJAY NAGAR DISTRICT VIJAYA NAGAR KARNATAKA 3. THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, DISTRICT URBAN DEVELOPMENT CELL, 2ND FLOOR, OFFICE OF DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DAM ROAD, HOSPETE 4. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER HARAPANAHALLI SUB DIVISION DISTRICT. VIJAYANAGAR Digitally signed by GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13176 WP No. 107095 of 2025 5. THE TAHASILDAR, HARAPANAHALLI, DISTRICT VIJAYANAGAR 6. MOHAMMED YAHEYA AGE. 27 YEARS, H. NO.1128/A/35 7TH WARD, REHMAT NAGAR, NEAR SAINT FATIMA SCHOOL, HARAPNAHALLI PIN-583131 TQ. HARAPANAHALLI, DIST. VIJAYANAGAR …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHARAD V. MAGADUM., AGA FOR R1 TO R5; NOTICE TO R6 IS D/W) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI BY QUASHING THE IMPUGNED LIST OF ALLOTTEES VIDE ANNEXURE-G AND H PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.5 IN SO FAR AS PETITIONER IS CONCERNED IN THIS WRIT PETITION AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) 1. Learned AGA accepts notice for respondents No.1 to 5. 2. Notice to respondent No.6 is dispensed with in view of the proposed order to be passed. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13176 WP No. 107095 of 2025 3. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: a. Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari by quashing the impugned list of allottees vide Annexure-G and H passed by the R5 in so far as petitioner is concerned in this writ petition. b. Issue writ of Mandamus directing the respondent authorities to modify the second guideline in such a way that it will not be Mis utilized by the Aspirants. c. Issue a writ of mandamus, directing the respondent No.2 herein to allot Karnataka-One franchisee to the petitioner, since she is eligible candidate for allotment of said franchisee. 4. The petitioner had applied for grant of franchise to Karnataka-one (e-seva Kendra) in terms of notification which has been issued by the respondents. The petitioner not being selected is before this Court seeking for quashing of the selection/approved list. 5. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the selection has been made on the basis of recommendation made by local member of Legislative Assembly and the actual aspects have not been taken into consideration. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13176 WP No. 107095 of 2025 6. Having perused the documents which have been produced, Annexure-G is the approved list and Annexure-H is the rejected list. Serial No.1 of the approved list relates to the particular location, which reads as under. Sl. No. Name Mobile No. Gen Location Address Qualification PG-4 marks UG-3marks Dip/ITI/PUC -2Marks (collect all zerox certificate) Resident of same ULB- 2marks, Non- resident of same ULB- 1marks, other taluka/ULB- 0marks Premises type: Own building with RCC- /sheet- 1marks, rental RCC/non RCC/First floor- 0marks IT Assets (Compu ter shop already present )- 1marks Diffe rentl y Able d/F/ Tran sgen der- Mark s Aadhaar certificatio n if yes-1 Marks NO-0 marks (collect Zerox certificate) Total Marks Remarks 1. MOHAME D YAHEYA 9606284534 M Star Colour Xerox, Harihara Hosapete Road, Harapanahall i, 583131 3 2 2 1 0 1 9 Approved 7. Sl.No.16 of the rejected list relates to the petitioner which is reproduced hereunder for easy reference; Sl. No. Name Mobile No. Gen Location Address Qualificati on PG-4 marks UG- 3marks Dip/ITI/P UC- 2Marks (collect all zerox certificate ) Resident of same ULB- 2marks, Non- resident of same ULB- 1marks, other taluka/ULB- 0marks Premises type: Own building with RCC- /sheet- 1marks, rental RCC/non RCC/First floor- 0marks IT Assets (Compu ter shop already present )- 1marks Diffe rentl y Able d/F/ Tran sgen der- Mark s Aadhaar certificatio n if yes-1 Marks NO-0 marks (collect Zerox certificate) Total Marks Remarks 16 . Taledahall i Manju 9535852550 F 10 th Ward, Gowli Street, Harihara Hospet Road, Harapanahalli, 583131 3 2 0 1 0 2 8 ಹಡಗಲಿ. ವಿಧಾನಸಭಾ ಕ್ಷೇತ್ರದ ಭಾಗ ಸಂಖ್ಯೆ: 177ರ ಕ್ರಮ ಸಂಖ್ಯೆ 527ರಲ್ಲಿ ಚುನಾವಣಾ ಗುರುತಿನ బిటి ಸಂಖ್ಯೆ:RRK32 21744 ಇದ್ದು, ಇವರು ಹಡಗಲಿ ತಾಲೂಕಿನ ಗಿರಿಯಾಪುರ ಗ್ರಾಮದ ನಿವಾಸಿಗಳೆಂದು ತಹಶೀಲ್ದಾರರ ು, ಹರಪನಹಳ್ಳಿರವ ರು ವರದಿ ಸಲ್ಲಿಸಿರುವುದರಿ ಂದ ಸದರಿಯವರ ಅರ್ಜಿಯನ್ನು ತಿರಸ್ಕರಿಸಲಾಗಿದೆ . - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13176 WP No. 107095 of 2025 8. Insofar as the location at “Harapanahalli” is concerned it is the petitioner and respondent No.6 who would have to be taken into consideration. 9. A perusal of the various tabulated details would indicate that in so far as the premises having been owned by respondent No.6 in the said location has been given 2 marks thereby leading to a total of 9 marks and in so far as the petitioner is concerned since she does not have any premises which is owned by her, hence she got zero marks on that account leading to a total of 8 marks. Thus, respondent No.9 has a higher mark of 9 marks with the petitioner having 8 marks. I do not find any infirmity in the said approved list, the petition stands dismissed. Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE SR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 39