Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 71224 (KAR)

SMT PADMAMMA v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/4044/2025 · 2025-07-10

Suraj Govindaraj

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25638 WP No. 4044 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 4044 OF 2025 (CS-RES) BETWEEN: SMT. PADMAMMA W/O ERGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/AT GUDUGANAHALLI VILLAGE, AKKIHEBBAL HOBLI, K R PETE TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. DHRUVA KUMARA D.N, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION M S BUILDINGS, DR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY. 2. THE STATE CO-OPERATIVE ELECTION COMMISSION 3RD FLOOR, TTMC A BLOCK, SHANTHI NAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 027, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 3. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER/ DISTRICT ELECTION OFFICER MANDYA DISTRICT, MANDYA - 571 401. Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25638 WP No. 4044 of 2025 4. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, MANDYA DIVISION, MANDYA - 571 401. 5. THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES, PANDAVAPURA SUB-DIVISION, MANDYA DISTRICT. 6. THE UNIT OF INDIA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES, NEW DELHI, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. YOGESH S. NAIK, AGA FOR R1, R3 TO R5; SRI. T.L. KIRAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER BEARING NO.SANI40/C-10/XSN/09/2024-25 DATED 07.12.2024 PASSED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT, WHICH IS PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-A AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25638 WP No. 4044 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ ORAL ORDER 1. Despite the order dated 13.06.2025, office objections have not been complied with. It appears that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the matter. 2. Hence, the petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. SD/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE DH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 46 CT: BHK