Karnataka Court June 1965 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
State of Mysore Vs. Srinivasan (M.R.)
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-03-1965
Reported in: (1966)IILLJ274Kant; (1965)2MysLJ27
ORDERSomnath Ayyar, J.1. On 13 November, 1963, the Inspector of Factories, Mysore Division, presented four complaints to the District Magistrate, Mandya, against the respondent In those complaints, the accused was charged with having committed various offences punishable under the relevant provisions of the Factories Act, 1948 (Central Act 63 of 1948). 2. In C.C. No. 60 of 1963 the accusation was that he had not guarded the grinder and had neglected to fence the belts driving the horizontal saw. In C.C. No. 61 of 1963, it was alleged that he had not maintained form 7 which was the record of lime washing and providing a first aid box and had not provided washing facilities for the use of the workers, In C.C. No. 62 of 1963 it was said that he had not provided drinking water facilities, latrines and urinals. In C.C. No. 63 of 1963 it was complained that he had not displayed as abstract in form 20 as enjoined by the Act. The complaints stated the various provisions of the Factories Act un...
State of Mysore Vs. M.R. Sreenivasan
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-03-1965
Reported in: 1966CriLJ560
A.R. Somnath Iyer, J.1. On November 13, 1963, the Inspector of Factories, Mysore Division, presented four complaints to the District Magistrate, Mandya, against the respondent. In those complaints, the accused was charged with having committed various offences punishable under the relevant provisions of the Factories Act, 1948 (Central Act 63 of 1948).2. In C, C. No. 60/63 the accusation was that he had not guarded the grinder and had neglected to fence the belts driving the horizontal saw. In C. C. No. 61/63, it was alleged that he had not maintained form No. 7 which was the record of lime washing and providing a first aid box and had not provided washing facilities for the use of the workers. In C. C. No. 62/63 it was said that he had not provided drinking water facilities, latrines and urinals. In C. C. No. 63/63 it was complained that he had not displayed an abstract in form No. 20 as enjoined by the Act. The complaints stated the various provisions of the Factories Act under which...
Kenchia and ors. Vs. State Level Recruitment Committee, Government of ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-03-1965
Reported in: AIR1966Kant36; AIR1966Mys36
Hegde, J. (1) In this Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioners seek the following reliefs:1. To quash Notification No.GAD/SLC/14/RNM/63 dated 31-8-1964, marked as Annexure 'K' in the case; 2. To restrain respondents 1 to 3 from terminating the services of the petitioners as Probation officers and further to restrain them from relieving them from their respective posts;AND 3.To issue a Writ prima facie Quo Warrato to respondents 4 to 28 to show cause under what right they claim to hold the office of Probation Officers and to oust them from the enjoyment of that office.(2) The material facts of the case are as follows: The petitioners herein were serving as Probation Officers. They were 'local candidates'. Their appointment was purely temporary. In accordance with the Notification issued in No. GAD 114 SRR 61, dated 27-12-1962, a State Level Recruitment Committee was constituted for the purpose of recruiting officers for the non-Ministerial posts at the State...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›