MALLIKSAB Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri.Mallikarjun B Hiremath, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 4.

(2.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners contended that, being aggrieved by the order passed by the respondents-authorities, the present writ petition is filed, whereby the respondents-authorities, while dismissing the petition filed by the petitioners herein, have referred to the judgment and decree in OS.No.294/2011 and against which, the respondents herein have filed RA.No.81/2014, which came to be dismissed, confirming the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.294/2011 and therefore, the impugned orders requires to be interfered with in this writ petition.

(3.) Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate sought to justify the impugned orders.