AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
7 paragraphs · 137 wordsAlok Aradhe, J
None for the petitioner.
Smt.Prathima Honnapura, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent Nos.1 and 2.
In this public interest litigation, the petitioner inter alia seeks a direction to Tahsildar, Bangalore South Taluk to decide the complaint submitted by the petitioner dated 18.01.2021.
We have perused the records of the petition and have heard the learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent Nos.1 and 2. Needless to state that the complaint dated 18.01.2021 submitted by the petitioner shall be dealt with in accordance with law by Tahsildar, Bangalore South Taluk, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as respondent No.3. expeditiously.
It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case of the parties.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
