Shaik Munna vs the State of Karnataka

Shaik Munna vs The State of Karnataka

Type Court Judgment Court Karnataka Decided Jan 10, 2025

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1653002

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/1653002
Court: Karnataka High Court
Judge: Jyoti Mulimani
Decided On: Jan 10, 2025
Case Number: WP/2611/2021

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Shaik Munna

Respondent

The State of Karnataka

Excerpt

.....limited, (a government of india enterprises suvarna bhavan, oorgaum po, kolar gold fields -563 120. represented by its estate officer. …respondents(by sri. srinivas kumar.m., hcgp for r1 & 2; sri. t.rajaram., advocate for r3) this writ petition is filed under article 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:oral ordersri.gireesha kodgi., counsel for the petitioners, sri.srinivas kumar.m., hcgp for respondents 1 and 2 and sri.t.rajaram., counsel for respondent no.3 have appeared in person.2. the captioned writ petition is filed seeking following reliefs:(a) issue writ of mandamus directing the respondent to grant police protection to the -3- property of the petitioners as per the schedule here under.(b) issue writ of certiorari quashing the impugned notice dated:15.01.2021 issued by respondent no.3 as per annexure-o.(c) issue writ of certiorari quashing the impugned notice dated:22.01.2021 issued by respondent no.3 as per annexure-p.3. counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions. heard the arguments and perused the writ papers with care.4. the grievance of the petitioners is that respondentno.3 is making attempts to evict the petitioners. however, the petitioners have filed a suit in o.s.no.02/2021 on the file of principal civil judge, kolar. since the petitioners have already taken shelter before the civil court, i decline to exercise power under writ jurisdiction. the writ petition is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed.5. resultantly, the writ petition is dismissed.-4- if at all the petitioners have any grievance against the notice they are at liberty to reply to the notices. sd/- (jyoti mulimani) judge mrp list no.: 1 sl no.: 66

Full Judgment

-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 2611 OF 2021 (GM-PP) BETWEEN:
1. SHAIK MUNNA S/O LATE BUDAN SAB, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/AT NO.456, HIS ROAD, C RAHIM NAGAR, BANGARAPET TALUK,
2. HUSSAIN BEE W/O LATE BUDAN SAB, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, R/AT NO.394, HIS ROAD, C.RAHIM NAGAR, BANGARAPET TALUK,
3. SALMAN SHARIFF S/O AHMED SHARIFF.M., AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, Digitally signed by
PREMCHANDRA M R          PRESENTLY RESIDENT AT NO.545,
Location: High Court     1ST CROSS, MARUTHI SAW MILL ROAD,
of Karnataka             ASHWATH NAGAR, THANISANDRA MAIN ROAD,
BENGALURU-560 077. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. GIREESHA KODGI., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY. -2-
2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KGF, KOLAR DISTRICT, KOLAR-563 120.
3. BHARATH GOLD MINES LIMITED, (A GOVERNMENT OF INDIA ENTERPRISES SUVARNA BHAVAN, OORGAUM PO, KOLAR GOLD FIELDS -563 120. REPRESENTED BY ITS ESTATE OFFICER. …RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SRINIVAS KUMAR.M., HCGP FOR R1 & 2; SRI. T.RAJARAM., ADVOCATE FOR R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 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:

ORAL ORDER

Sri.Gireesha Kodgi., counsel for the petitioners, Sri.Srinivas Kumar.M., HCGP for respondents 1 and 2 and Sri.T.Rajaram., counsel for respondent No.3 have appeared in person.

2. The captioned Writ Petition is filed seeking following reliefs:

(a) Issue Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to grant police protection to the -3- property of the petitioners as per the schedule here under.

(b) Issue Writ of Certiorari quashing the impugned notice dated:15.01.2021 issued by respondent No.3 as per Annexure-O.

3. Counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the Writ papers with care.

4. The grievance of the petitioners is that respondent

No.3 is making attempts to evict the petitioners. However, the petitioners have filed a suit in O.S.No.02/2021 on the file of Principal Civil Judge, Kolar. Since the petitioners have already taken shelter before the Civil Court, I decline to exercise power under Writ jurisdiction. The Writ Petition is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed.

5. Resultantly, the Writ Petition is dismissed.

-4- If at all the petitioners have any grievance against the notice they are at liberty to reply to the notices. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE MRP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 66

Same Court & Year Karnataka · 2025 Same Parties Shaik Munna vs The State of Karnataka Same Judge Jyoti Mulimani