SUMAN Vs. PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Writ Appeal No.100072/2022 by the State of Karnakata and its authorities who are arrayed as respondent Nos.1, 4, 5 and 7 is directed against the impugned order dtd. 10/8/2020 passed in Writ petition Nos.114409-114413 of 2019 & 103989-103991 of 2020 whereby the said petitions preferred by respondent Nos.1 to 8/ writ petitioners was allowed by the learned Single Judge.

(2.) Heard Sri. Gangadhar J.M., learned AAG, Smt. Girija Kiremath, learned HCGP for the appellants, Sri. Shivaraj C.Bellakki learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3, Sri. Sangram S.Kulkarni, learned counsel for respondent Nos.9 and 10 and Sri. Venkateshh Kharvi, learned CGSC for respondent No.11.

(3.) Perusal of the material on record would indicate that the appellants/ State did not filed the statement of objections to the petitions and submission was made that the representation of the writ petitioners would be considered in accordance with law. It is the grievance of the appellants that despite the specific stance of the State Government that they would only consider the representation and there was no concession made by the State that it would make payment in favour of the respondents/ writ petitioners or that the respondents/ writ petitioners are entitled to the claim put forth by them, learned Single Judge has proceeded on the assumption that the respondent Nos.1 to 8 are admittedly/ undisputedly entitled to the amount claimed by them. It is therefore submitted that if one more opportunity is granted in favour of the appellants/ State, they would file their Statement of objections to the writ petitions and contest the same and the impugned order be set aside and the matter be remitted back to the learned Single Judge for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law.