GANGADHAR SHIVALINGAPPA NAGMOTI Vs. STATE OF MYSORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard the learned advocate for the petitioner at great length. We have also been taken through all the material proportions of the report made by the specially empowered authority and our attentions has been invited to many salient points set out in the petitioner's affidavit.

(2.) After careful consideration of the arguments and reference to the materials placed before us, we are unable to agree with his contentions that the findings of the specially empowered authority are either based on surmise, or that it is based on no evidence. We are unable to agree that this case is one of the type of Goel case AIR1964 SC 364 , [1964 (9 )FLR161 ], (1964 )I LLJ38 SC , (1964 )66 PLR305 , [1964 ]4 SCR718 .

(3.) In our view, there is sufficient evidence on which the conclusions arrived at by the specially empowered authority, could be properly based.