Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 72072 (KAR)

RAVI DEVAGIDA v. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/25176/2024 · 2025-07-10

Suraj Govindaraj

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26362 WP No. 25176 of 2024 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. 25176 OF 2024 (CS-RES) BETWEEN: RAVI DEVAGIDA, S/O SHANKAR DEVADIGA, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/AT HOSAVAKLUMANE, UPPINAKUDUR VILLAGE AND POST, KUNDAPURA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. JAYANTHA POOJARY., ADVOCATE (ABSENT)) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, VIKASA SOUDHA, DR. B R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE - 560 001. 2. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, KUNDAPURA SUB DIVISION, UDUPI DISTRICT – 576 201. 3. SAPTHASWARA VIVIDDODESHA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., TALLUR, TALLUR VILLAGE AND POST, KUNDAPURA TALUK, Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26362 WP No. 25176 of 2024 UDUPI DISTRICT. REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, VISHAL DEVADIGA, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, HUTTINAMANE, TALLUR VILLAGE AND POST, KUNDAPURA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.A.S.HARISH, AGA FOR R1; SRI.PURNACHANDRA M PURANIK, ADVOCATE FOR C/R3 IN CP 12087/24 GA SERVED) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE AWARD DATED 28.06.2024 PASSED BY THE R-2 IN SURCHARGE CASE NO.03/2023-24 (ANNX-A) CONSEQUENTLY REMAND THE MATTER BEFORE THE R-2 FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION AFTER GIVING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE PETITIONER TO CONTEST THE MATTER ON MERITS AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR DISMISSAL FOR NON- PROSECUTION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26362 WP No. 25176 of 2024 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.: 39