Writ Petition

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
WRIT PETITION NO._______/2023
MR. R. SHARATH …
PETITIONER
VERSUS
STATE OF KARNATAKA
Department of Law, Justice, and Human Rights,
Vidhana Soudha,
Dr Ambedkar Veedhi,
Bengaluru, Karnataka,
PIN Code: 560001
KARNATAKA STATE LEGAL SERVICES AUTHORITY (KSLSA)
Nyaya Degula Building, 1st Floor,
H. Siddaiah Road,
Bangalore - 560027,
Karnataka, India.
…RESPONDENTS
PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR
ISSUANCE OF A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS UNDER ARTICLE 226
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
To Hon'ble The Chief Justice of India and His Lordship's Companion Justices of the Supreme
Court of India. The Humble petition of the Petitioner above named
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHEWETH
1. The Petitioner, Mr Sharath, is the aggrieved party seeking legal redress under Article
226 of the Constitution of India.
2. The Respondent No. 1 is the State of Karnataka, Respondent No. 2 is Karnataka State
Legal Services Authority (KSLSA)
3. The present writ petition challenges an executive order or by law that
unconstitutionally ousts or excludes the jurisdiction of civil courts, infringing upon the
fundamental rights and access to justice of citizens.
FACTS OF THE CASE
1. The petitioner, Mr Sharath, a resident of Karnataka, is aggrieved by an executive

order or bylaw issued by the relevant authorities, which arbitrarily ousts the
jurisdiction of civil courts in matters where individuals' rights and disputes are
concerned.
2. The impugned executive action, by its design, effectively excludes the jurisdiction of
civil courts, depriving citizens of their inherent right to seek legal recourse through
the established judicial framework.
3. The order or bylaw in question unjustly creates a parallel mechanism or tribunal,
limiting or eliminating the avenues available for individuals to seek redressal of
grievances in civil matters within the purview of the civil court's jurisdiction.
4. This executive overreach infringes upon the citizens' rights guaranteed under the
Constitution of India, obstructing their access to justice and fair adjudication of
disputes.
5. Despite representations highlighting the adverse implications of such an order or
bylaw, no corrective measures have been taken by the concerned authorities.
GROUNDS
The executive order or bylaw unilaterally excluding the jurisdiction of civil courts is
arbitrary, unreasonable, and violative of the principles of natural justice.
1. Violation of Fundamental Rights:

The impugned order effectively denies access to justice by ousting the jurisdiction of
civil courts, thereby infringing upon the fundamental right to judicial review
guaranteed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
2. Exclusion of Civil Court Jurisdiction:
 The impugned order unconstitutionally excludes the jurisdiction of the civil court,
depriving the petitioner of the right to seek legal remedies in a competent court of law.
 The order fails to provide a reasonable and just alternative mechanism for dispute
resolution, thereby leaving citizens without an effective remedy.
3. Ultra Vires:
 The order is ultra vires the Constitution of India as it exceeds the authority conferred
upon the executive authority by law.
 Such executive action, curtailing the jurisdiction of civil courts, undermines the
established judicial process and contravenes the constitutional scheme of separation of
powers.
4. Lack of Alternative Remedy:
The petitioner has no alternative and equally efficacious remedy available to
challenge the order and seek redressal for the grievances.
AFFIDAVIT OF PETITIONER
The Petitioner affirms that the contents of this petition are true and correct to the best of their
knowledge and belief and nothing material has been concealed therein.
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased
to:
I. Issue a writ of mandamus, directing the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority (KSLSA)
to refrain from further actions that infringe upon the jurisdiction of civil courts and to uphold
the rights of citizens to approach civil courts for legal remedies.
II. Pass any other Writ or Order and be pleased to declare the impugned order or bylaw
unconstitutional and invalid, safeguarding the jurisdiction of civil courts as per constitutional
provisions.
III. Provide such further reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit, in the facts and
circumstances of the case, to uphold the principles of justice and fairness.
IV. Award the costs of the petition to the Petitioner.
FOR WHICH ACT OF KINDNESS, THE PETITIONER SHALL AS INDUTY

BOUND, EVER PRAY.
INTERIM PRAYER
Wherefore, pending disposal of the main Petition, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased
to stay the operation of the impugned order or bylaw, thereby restoring the jurisdiction of
civil courts until a final decision is made.
I, R. SHARATH (Petitioner), do hereby declare and verify under oath that the contents of this
petition are true and correct to my knowledge and belief, and no part of it is false, and
nothing material has been concealed therein.
FILED BY:
(ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER/
PETITIONER-IN-PERSON)
FILED ON:

Writ Petition

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Writ Petition

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Writ Petition

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

WRIT PETITION NO._______/2023

Department of Law, Justice, and Human Rights,

PIN Code: 560001

KARNATAKA STATE LEGAL SERVICES AUTHORITY (KSLSA)

Nyaya Degula Building, 1st Floor,

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHEWETH

FACTS OF THE CASE

1. The petitioner, Mr Sharath, a resident of Karnataka, is aggrieved by an executive

1. Violation of Fundamental Rights:

IV. Award the costs of the petition to the Petitioner.

FOR WHICH ACT OF KINDNESS, THE PETITIONER SHALL AS INDUTY

(ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER/

You might also like