(BY SRI. B.R. SUNDARA RAJA GUPTA, ADVOCATE) v. (BY SRI. S.H. RAGHAVENDRA, AGA)
Case at a glance
Outcome
Withdrawn
The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India arts. 226, 227
- Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 s. 81
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE KBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23 CT: BHK
Judgment
Cause title
(BY SRI. B.R. SUNDARA RAJA GUPTA, ADVOCATE) …PETITIONER
AND: THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, TUMKUR - 572 101. (BY SRI. S.H. RAGHAVENDRA, AGA) …RESPONDENT
THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO DISPOSE OF THE PETITIONERS APPLICATIONS FILED UNDER SECTION 81 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT 1988 R/W RULE 76 OF THE KARNATAKA MOTOR VEHICLES RULES 1989 FOR RENEWAL OF PERMIT NO. PST S NO. 23/2009-10 MARKED AS ANNX-A TO A5 RESPECTIVELY AS EARLY AS POSSIBLE AND PREFERABLY WITHIN 4 WEEKS FROM THE DATE OF RECEIPT OF THE
ORDER.
Digitally signed by C HONNUR SAB Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:6458 WP No. 41 of 2025 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE ORAL ORDER Learned Additional Government Advocate files an endorsement issued to the petitioner.
The same is placed on record.
Learned counsel for the petitioner orally seeks leave of the Court to withdraw the petition.
Submission is placed on record.
Operative part
The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE KBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23 CT: BHK
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — arts. 226, 227; Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — s. 81.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.