Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 88355 (KAR)

SMT KAVERI KEDARNATH v. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/33311/2025 · 2025-11-10

Suraj Govindaraj

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45566 WP No. 33311 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 33311 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SMT KAVERI KEDARNATH, W/O KEDARNATH M.C., AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS R/AT 1761, 6TH A MAIN ROAD, D - BLOCK, NEAR VARALAKAHSMI NURSHING HOME, 2ND STAGE, RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU-560 010 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. S.RAJASHEKAR.,ADV.,) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF HOME VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560 001 REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY 2. KARNATAKA STATE COMMISSIONER FOR WOMEN, 1ST FLOOR, KARNATAKA HOME BOARD BUILDING, KAVERI BHAVAN, BANGALORE-560 009 REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN 3. GIRISH LOKANATHA MATTANNAVAR S/O LOKANATHA MATTANNAVAR, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS R/AT GURMITAKAL, YADGIR-585 214 ALSO AT GIRISH LOKANATHA MATTANNAVAR S/O LOKANATHA MATTANNAVAR, Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45566 WP No. 33311 of 2025 AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/AT NO.J-5, KARNATAKA UNIVERSIY CAMPUS, DHARWAD-580 003 GIRISH LOKANATHA MATTANNAVAR S/O LOKANATHA MATTANNAVAR AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS G-10, B BLOCK, FORTUNA CLASC APARTMENT, 4TH CROSS ROAD, CANARA BANK LAYOUT, KODIGEHALLI, BENGALURU-560 097 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SARITHA KULKARNI, AGA FOR R1 & 2 V/O DATED 10.11.2025, NOTICE TO R3 IS D/W) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R2 TO CONSIDER THE COMPLAINT / REPRESENTATION DTD 29.08.25 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER VIDE ANNX-A AND TO TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ ORAL ORDER 1. Learned AGA accepts notice for respondent Nos. 1 and 2. 2. Notice to respondent No.3 is dispensed with in view of the proposed order to be passed and the fact that reliefs are only claimed against respondent No. 2. 3. Petitioner in this petition seeks the following reliefs: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45566 WP No. 33311 of 2025 "WHEREFORE, the petitioner respectfully prays that his Hon'ble Court may be pleased to:- a) Issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondent No.2 to consider the complaint/representation dated 29.08.2025 submitted by the petitioner vide Annexures- A and to take appropriate action in accordance with law. b) Issue any other writ, order or direction as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper relief's as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper under the circumstances of the case." 4. The petitioner alleging that various statements have been made by respondent No. 3 which require enquiry to be conducted had submitted a representation to respondent No. 2 for such enquiry to be conducted. No enquiry having been conducted, the petitioner is before this Court seeking for the opposite relief. 5. Whenever any application is filed to any authority, more so like respondent No.2 - Commission to conduct an enquiry, it was required for respondent No. 2 to consider the representation and either accept the request made or reject the same. Needless to say if a rejection has been passed, the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45566 WP No. 33311 of 2025 same should be accompanied by reasons. Neither having been done, I pass the following:- ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed, ii. A mandamus is issued directing respondent No.2 to consider the representation of the petitioner and pass necessary orders as expeditiously as possible, within a period of 3 weeks from today. iii. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the petition. SD/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE Bsv List No.: 1 Sl No.: 36