SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

INDIRA GANDHI SCHOOL OF NURSING – Appellant
Versus
KARNATAKA STATE NURSING COUNCIL – Respondent
WP 7254/2021



1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF JULY, 2021

BEFORE

THE HON9BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

WRIT PETITION NO.7254 OF 2021 (EDN-EX)

BETWEEN:

1. INDIRA GANDHI SCHOOL OF NURSING

NO.23, CHOKKANAHALLI

JAKKUR POST,

BENGALURU-560064

REPRESENTED BY ITS

PRINCIPAL MR.SIVA SANKAR

2. SIVAKUMAR V R

S/O V R RAVINDRAN

AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS

3. SUHAGIYA BANSARI MUKESHBHAI

D/O MUKESHBHAI

AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS

4. SOMA RAY

D/O UTTAM RAY

AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS

5. SARMISTHA DUTTA

D/O SUJIT KUMAR DUTTA

AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS

6. JOYDEB DAS BAIRAGYA

S/O MUKTI PADA DAS BAIRAGYA

AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS

2

7. BABITA CHAKRABORTY

D/O TAPAN CHAKRABORTY

AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS

8. JOYSREE SARKAR

D/O JAGANNATH SARKAR

AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS

9. TRIPTI CHATTERJEE

D/O GOPAL CHATTERJEE

AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS

10. PINKI MANNA

D/O PRADIP MANNA

AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS

11. PAPIYA DEY

D/O ADITY DEY

AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS

12. PRIYANKA KUMARI

D/O D P BISWAKARMA

AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS

13. APARNA BISWAS

D/O DILIP BISWAS

AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS

14. PUJA ROY

D/O SUBAL ROY

AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS

15. SANGITA DAS

D/O ANANDA DAS

AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS

16. GANDHI KUMAR

S/O SURENDRA KUMAR

AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS

3

17. SUSMITA PAUL

D/O SHITAL PAUL

AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS

18. MOUSMI PAL

D/O NANDADULAL PAL

AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS

PETITIONER NOS.2 TO 18 ARE THE

STUDENTS OF PETITIONER NO.1 SCHOOL

...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI.AMRESH N, ADVOCATE)

AND

1.

KARNATAKA STATE NURSING COUNCIL

REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR

NIGHTINGALE TOWER

GANDHI NAGAR

BENGALURU-560 009

2.

KARNATAKA STATE DIPLOMA IN NURSING

EXAMINATION BOARD

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

1ST FLOOR, LIBRARY BLOCK

BMC AND RESEARCH INSTITUTE CAMPUS

BENGALURU-560 002

&..RESPONDENTS

(BY MISS.SUMANA BALIGA M, ADVOCATE FOR R.1;

SRI.YOGESH D NAIK, ADVOCATE FOR R.2)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES

226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING

TO DIRECT THE R.2 BOARD TO ISSUE HALL TICKET BY

ACCEPTING THE BALANCE OF EXAMINATION FEE AND

PERMIT THE PETITIONER STUDENTS NOS.2 TO 18 TO

TAKE UP THE 1ST YEAR GNM EXAMINATION AND ETC.,

4

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY

HEARING-B GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE

FOLLOWING:

ORDER

Learned counsel for the petitioners has filed a

memo dated 01.07.2021 seeking withdrawal of the

writ petition.

2. Memo is taken on record.

3. In view of the said memo, the writ petition is

dismissed as withdrawn.

Sd/-

JUDGE

NBM

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top