NAGENDRAPPA Vs. STATE OP KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. Dabali, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that there is a circular against the issuance of licences afresh and therefore this writ petition shall be considered in the 'B' group itself.

(2.) The practice is to place a writ petition filed, for consideration of the court as to whether it discloses a prima facie case; this is done at the preliminary hearing stage. Rule 13 of the Writ Proceedings Rules, 1977 governs the procedure. As per clause (a), court shall direct a Rule Nisi to the respondent calling upon him to show cause as to why the order sought should not be made; the concept of 'Rule Nisi' is embodied in the very clause, where it says that the respondent is called upon "to show cause why the order sought should not be made". A proviso is engrafted to this clause which says that where the court 'deems fit', it may, before directing issue of Rule Nisi, direct notice to the respondent to show cause why Rule Nisi should not be issued. As per clause (b), it may dismiss the petition if the court is not satisfied that there are grounds to issue Rule Nisi. Rule 17 prescribe the form of the notice. Rule 21, provides for the answer to be made by the respondent against the petition. This answer is to the Rule Nisi; normally this answer is to be made within 14 days of the time fixed for appearance; Rule also provide for the reply to the objections filed by the respondent.

(3.) Technically, filing of a 'statement of objections' by the respondent arises, only when a show-cause notice is issued as to why Rule Nisi should not be issued under proviso to Rule 13(a)