Pramod G vs the Union of India

Pramod G vs The Union of India

Type Court Judgment Court Karnataka Orders Decided Feb 03, 2026

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1502010

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1502010
Court: Karnataka Orders High Court
Judge: K.S.Hemalekha
Decided On: Feb 03, 2026
Case Number: WP/100751/2026

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Pramod G

Respondent

The Union of India

Excerpt

.....is filed under articles 226 and 227 of the constitution of india praying to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents consider the representations dated 25.01.2017 made by the petitioners vide annexure-e in so far as the present petitioenrs are concerned in this writ petition and etc. this writ petitioncoming on for preliminary hearing this day, order was made therein as under: coram: the hon'ble mrs justice k.s.hemalekha -4-oral order1. the petitioners have approached this court seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to consider their representations dated 25.01.2017 (annexure-e).2. learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitsthat, despite submission of the aforesaid representations and lapse of a reasonable period of time, the respondent authorities have failed to consider the same, thereby compelling the petitioners to approach this court.3. sri. m. b. kanavi, learned cgsc appearing for therespondents submits that the representations have been received by the competent authority and that the same would be considered and appropriate orders would be passed in accordance with law.4. having regard to the submission made and the limitedgrievance of the petitioners, which is confined to -5- consideration of the representations, this court is of the view that the ends of justice would be met by issuing appropriate directions to the respondents.5. accordingly, this court pass the following:orderi. the writ petition is disposed of. ii. a writ of mandamus is issued directing the respondents to consider the representations of the petitioners dated 25.01.2017 (annexure-e) and to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within an outer limit of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. sd/- justice k.s.hemalekha gab ct:vh list no.: 1 sl no.: 35

Full Judgment

-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO. 100751 OF 2026 (S-RES) BETWEEN:
1. PRAMOD G. R/O. GF 001, AMAN RESIDENCY, ARUN COLONY, GADAG ROAD, HUBLI, DIST: DHARWAD-580020.
2. BASAVARAJ BOLANNAVAR, AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: EX-SERVICEMAN, R/O. VAIBHAV NAGAR, KUSASUGAL, DIST. DHARWAD-580023.
3. SURENDRAN V

GIRIJA A. AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: EX-SERVICEMAN, BYAHATTI R/O. 103, KOTHARI NAGAR, HUBLI, Digitally signed by GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Location: HIGH COURT DIST: DHARWAD - 580020, OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2026.02.04 10:29:22 +0530

4. C. M. SRINIVASAN, AGE: 56 YEARS, OCC: EX-SERVICEMAN, R/O. FLAT NO. 304, SAS PRIDE 4 APARTMENT, BEHIND CAPITANIO SCHOOL, SUNDARPURAM LAYOUT, HUBLI, DIST. DHARWAD - 580020. -2-

5. MOHAN PATIL, AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: EX-SERVICEMAN, R/O. SHASRTI NAGAR, B.K.KANGRALI, DIST. BELAGAVI - 590010.

6. PRAKASH CHOUGULE, AGE: 56 YEARS, OCC: EX-SERVICEMAN, R/O. 2283, 2ND CROSS, SAMRUDHI COLONY, GANESHPUR, BELAGAVI-591108.

7. VEERAPPA TELASANG, R/O. H. NO.4, 1ST CROSS, SIDDARAM NAGAR, GOPANKOPPA, HUBLI, DIST. DHARWAD-580023.

8. MADIVALAPPA S. KUMBAR, AS TRACKMAN R/O. PLOT NO. 253, BANASREE NAAGAR, DODDANAYAKANAKOPPA, K. C. PARK DHARWAD, DIST. DHARWAD - 580008.

9. MEGHARAJ S. VANNAL, AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: EX-SERVICEMAN, R/O. 299, 2ND PHASE, AKSHAY COLONY, GOKUL ROAD HUBLI, UDYAMNAGAR DHARWAD, DIST. DHARWAD - 580030.

10. C B SUDHAKAR BABU, AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: TRACKMAN, R/O. PLOT NO. 44/B, NEHARU NAGR, (EXTENSION), OPPOSITE POLICE QTRS, -3- GADAG ROAD, HUBLI, DIST: DHARWAD - 580020. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SOURABH HEGDE, ADVOCATE) AND:

1. THE UNION OF INDIA THE MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS, RAISINA ROAD, NEW DELHI-110001, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

2. DIVISION SECURITY COMMISSIONER, RAILWAY PROTECTION FORCE, UBL. DIVISION, HUBBALLI 580020.

3. THE WORKSHOP PERSONAL OFFICER,

AT THE CARRIAGE REPAIR WORKSHOP, UBLS, HUBBALLI 580020. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.B.KANAVI, CGSC) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS, DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATIONS DATED 25.01.2017 MADE BY THE PETITIONERS VIDE ANNEXURE-E IN SO FAR AS THE PRESENT PETITIOENRS ARE CONCERNED IN THIS WRIT PETITION AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITIONCOMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA -4-

ORAL ORDER

1. The petitioners have approached this Court seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to consider their representations dated 25.01.2017 (Annexure-E).

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits

that, despite submission of the aforesaid representations and lapse of a reasonable period of time, the respondent authorities have failed to consider the same, thereby compelling the petitioners to approach this Court.

3. Sri. M. B. Kanavi, learned CGSC appearing for the

respondents submits that the representations have been received by the competent authority and that the same would be considered and appropriate orders would be passed in accordance with law.

4. Having regard to the submission made and the limited

grievance of the petitioners, which is confined to -5- consideration of the representations, this Court is of the view that the ends of justice would be met by issuing appropriate directions to the respondents.

5. Accordingly, this Court pass the following:

ORDER

i. The writ petition is disposed of. ii. A writ of mandamus is issued directing the respondents to consider the representations of the petitioners dated 25.01.2017 (Annexure-E) and to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within an outer limit of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Sd/- JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA gab Ct:VH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 35

Same Court & Year Karnataka Orders · 2026 Same Parties Pramod G vs The Union of India Same Judge K.S.Hemalekha