Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 85695 (KAR)

SRI.SIDDAPPA KAREPPA GASTI v. THE SECRETARY

WP/60139/2011 · 2025-08-01

Suraj Govindaraj

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9601 WP No. 60139 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF AUGUST 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO.60139 OF 2011 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: SIDDAPPA KAREPPA GASTI, AGE: 67 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: KONNUR VILLAGE, TALUKA: JAMKHANDI. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. M. C. HUKKERI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, VIDANSOUDHA, BANGALORE. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DIST: BAGALKOT. 3. MALLAPPA TIPPANNA SHIROL, AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: KONNUR, TQ: JAMKHANDI. 4. RAMAPPA TIPPANNA SHIROL, AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: KONNUR, TQ: JAMKHANDI. 5. PARIS TIPPANNA SHIROL, AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: KONNUR, TQ: JAMKHANDI. 6. MAHADEV TIPPANNA SHIROL, AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: KONNUR, TQ: JAMKHANDI. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. T. HANUMAREDDY, AGA FOR R1 & R2; R3 IS SERVED; R4 TO R6 - NOTICE HELD SUFFICIENT) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR QUASHING THE ORDER DATTED 25/03/2010 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 PRODUCED AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE-E 2007 IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC., Digitally signed by V N BADIGER Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9601 WP No. 60139 of 2011 THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) 1. On the last occasion, when the matter was earlier taken up, the counsel for the petitioner had indicated that he had no instructions and that a memo of retirement would be filed. However, today there is no appearance on behalf of the petitioner, nor he has filed any retirement memo. This conduct suggests that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the matter. 2. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed for non- prosecution. Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE VB/CT-ASC/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 113