KARNATAKA v. (BY SRI. SHANTHI BHUSHAN H., DSGI)
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
In light of the same, petition is dismissed as
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India arts. 226, 227
Key paragraphs
- Para 22. In light of the same, petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. Consequentially, Movement Order is also set aside.
Judgment
(BY SRI. SUNIL KUMAR H., ADVOCATE) AND:
#1. UNION OF INDIA BY THE SECRETARY MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS GOVERNMENT OF INDIA NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110 001
#2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL BORDER SECURITY FORCE, LODI ROAD, NEW DELHI-110 003 Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA … PETITIONER
#3. THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FRONTIER HEADQUARTERS (SPECIAL OPS), YELAHANKA, BANGALORE -560 063 (BY SRI. SHANTHI BHUSHAN H., DSGI) … RESPONDENTS - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:48371 WP No. 29357 of 2024 THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DTD. 13.10.2024 VIDE ANNEXURE-A ISSUED BY THE R- 3 IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER DTD. 23.10.2024 VIDE ANNEXURE-F AND POST THE PETITIONER IN BANGALORE AS PER THE BSF TENURE AND TRANSFER REGULATIONS AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV ORAL ORDER Sri H. Shanthi Bhushan, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India files copy of the order dated 24.11.2024 by virtue of which the order dated 13.10.2024 which is the order of transfer impugned in the present proceedings has been withdrawn.
#2. In light of the same, petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. Consequentially, Movement Order is also set aside.
#3. In light of the order of respondentNo.1 dated
24.11.2024, liberty is reserved to the respondents to - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC:48371 WP No. 29357 of 2024 dispose of petitioner's representation dated 23.10.2024 in terms as referred to in para-8. All contentions are kept open. VGR Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: In light of the same, petition is dismissed as
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — arts. 226, 227.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No treatment data yet for this judgment in the Courts & Cases corpus.
Absence of data is not a statement about the judgment’s standing — the corpus covers only judgments we index and link with cited evidence.