Skip to content
Try for free
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.
See full guide →

Hemanthkumar vs the State of Karnataka

Hemanthkumar vs The State of Karnataka

Type Court Judgment Court Karnataka Orders Decided Mar 27, 2025
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1607670

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
AI Brief & Ask Semantic Search Verdict Lens Devil's Bench DocMind
Start free trial See sample brief

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Karnataka Orders High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
WP/105751/2016

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Hemanthkumar

Respondent

The State of Karnataka

Excerpt

.....hungund,6. the panchayat development officer, grama panchayat, marol,7. the president, grama panchayat,8. sri.chandrashekar r.chittaragi, ex-pdo, grama panchayat, deleted-vide order dated:01.08.2024.9. smt. husenabi w/o allasab naykodi, ex-president, grama panchayat, …respondents (by sri. praveen.k.uppar., aga for r1-3; sri. bhusan kulkarni., advocate for r4-7; sri. s.c.hiremath., advocate for r9; r8-deleted v/o dated:01.08.2024)this writ petition is filed under articles 226 and 227 of the constitution of india, seeking certain reliefs. this writ petition is listed for preliminary hearing in ‘b’ group, this day, an order is made as under: -3-oral orderwhen the case is called, the petitioner party-in-person is not represented. when the case is listed and called out, the party-in-person must be present. the absence may affect the case. as could be seen from the daily order sheet, the petition was listed on 06.03.2025, on that day, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner, either personally or through video conferencing. hence, for appearance on behalf of the petitioner, the petition was ordered to be listed on 27.03.2025. the petition is listed today for appearance on behalf of the petitioner. as already noted above, when the case is called, the petitioner is not represented. the petition is filed back in2016. now we are in the month of march, 2025. it is pendingfrom almost nine years. it appears that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the petition. hence, the writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. sd/- (jyoti mulimani) judge clk list no.: 1 sl no.: 57

Full Judgment

-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 105751 OF 2016 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: HEMANTHKUMAR S/O LAKSHMAPPA HAVARAGI, AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC: ADVOCATE, R/O HAVARAGI, TQ: HUNGUND, DIST. BAGALKOT, NOW R/AT. M.R.DAVALE, NEAR BHABUSINGH THAKUR PEDHA, LINE BAZAAR, DHARWAD. …PETITIONER [ABSENT] AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, Digitally signed by VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU. PREMCHANDRA M R Location: HIGH COURT OF 2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA KARNATAKA PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND PANCHAYAT RAJ, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU.

3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BAGALKOT, DIST: BAGALKOT,

4. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICIER, ZILLA PANCHAYAT, BAGALKOT, -2-

5. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER, TALUKA PANCHAYAT HUNGUND,

6. THE PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, GRAMA PANCHAYAT, MAROL,

7. THE PRESIDENT, GRAMA PANCHAYAT,

8. SRI.CHANDRASHEKAR R.CHITTARAGI, EX-PDO, GRAMA PANCHAYAT, DELETED-VIDE ORDER DATED:01.08.2024.

9. SMT. HUSENABI W/O ALLASAB NAYKODI, EX-PRESIDENT, GRAMA PANCHAYAT, …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRAVEEN.K.UPPAR., AGA FOR R1-3; SRI. BHUSAN KULKARNI., ADVOCATE FOR R4-7; SRI. S.C.HIREMATH., ADVOCATE FOR R9; R8-DELETED V/O DATED:01.08.2024)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS. THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: -3-

ORAL ORDER

When the case is called, the petitioner party-in-person is not represented. When the case is listed and called out, the party-in-person must be present. The absence may affect the case. As could be seen from the daily order sheet, the petition was listed on 06.03.2025, on that day, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner, either personally or through video conferencing. Hence, for appearance on behalf of the petitioner, the petition was ordered to be listed on 27.03.2025. The petition is listed today for appearance on behalf of the petitioner. As already noted above, when the case is called, the petitioner is not represented. The petition is filed back in

2016. Now we are in the month of March, 2025. It is pending

from almost nine years. It appears that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the petition. Hence, the Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE CLK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 57

Continue Your Research

Same Court & Year Karnataka Orders · 2025 Same Parties Hemanthkumar vs The State of Karnataka Same Judge Jyoti Mulimani
preliminary hearing Deputy Commissioner Video conferencing Chief Executive On behalf of high court The State

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial
1M+ judgments indexed

Brief any judgment in 18 sections.

Search Supreme Court, High Courts, and tribunals - then open an AI Brief on any result. Core search is free; full AI desk free for 7 days.

Start 7-day free trial - no card Talk to Sales