SMT NALINA SHANTHA KUMAR v. ASST. DIRECTOR
Case at a glance
- Bench
- ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
- Neutral citation
- 2026:KHC:5831
Outcome
Dismissed
Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Key paragraphs
- Para 33. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE GVP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 64
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO. 23882 OF 2023 (L-RES) BETWEEN: SMT NALINA SHANTHA KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS, WIFE OF LATE VICTOR PREM KUMAR, NO 112/IC -7 CROSS, 18 B MAIN, JP NAGAR, II ND PHASE, BANGALORE - 560078. (BY MISS CHARITHA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI M D RANGASWAMY, ADVOCATE) AND:
ASST. DIRECTOR, ESI CORPORATION, NO 10, BINNY FIELDS BINNYPET, BENGALURU - 560023.
RECOVERY OFFICER, ESI CORPORATION, NO.10, BINNY FIELDS, BINNYPET, BENGALURU - 560 023. Digitally signed by PRAMILA G V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA …PETITIONER …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI YATISH S, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS LEADING TO THE PASSING OF THE ORDER DTD 13.07.2023 AND 17.07.2023 PASSED BY THE R2 ANNEXURE-A AND B. QUASH THE ORDER DTD 13.07.2023 AND 17.07.2023 PASSED BY THE ASST. DIRECTOR AND RECOVERY OFFICER OF ESIC, BANGALORE ANNEXURE-A AND B. - 2 - NC: 2026:KHC:5831 WP No. 23882 of 2023 HC-KAR THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE ORAL ORDER Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo seeking leave of the Court to withdraw the petition.
2. Memo is accepted.
Operative part
Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE GVP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 64
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226.
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.