HARISH BABU Y.N. Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks invalidation of the impugned order on the ground that the same is without jurisdiction and has been passed without ascertaining the jurisdictional facts. He draws the attention of the Court to the representation which his client had made on 6/9/2022, a copy whereof avails at Annexure-J.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner draws the attention of this Court to decisions of Co-ordinate Benches which fully supports his case, i.e., W.P.No.3514/2020 (GM- PDS) between ERYA NAIK vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA & OTHERS disposed off on 21/2/2022 (Annexure-K) & W.P.No.7358/2022 (GM-PDS) between SMT. GANGAMBIKE V.S. vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA & OTHERS (Annexure-L) He adds that, in view of these decisions the subject representation ought to have been considered and till such consideration takes place, his apple cart should not be disturbed.

(3.) Learned AGA on request having accepted notice for the respondents, makes submission in justification of the impugned order contending that it is consistent with statutory policy and that the author of the order has considered all aspects of the matter, therefore, writ court exercising supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution may not undertake a deeper examination thereof. This contention is bit difficult to countenance inasmuch as, petitioner's representation has remained without response from the official respondents.