Karnataka Court June 1996 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.
Indian Medical Association and anr. Vs. State of Karnataka and anr.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-05-1996
Reported in: ILR1996KAR3021; 1997(42)KarLJ48
ORDERG.C. Bharuka, J.1. In these two Writ Petitions, petitioners have called in question the validity of Serial No. 2C of the Schedule to the Karnataka Profession Tax Act, 1976 (in short, 'the Act') which pertains to providing of rate of tax under the said Act in respect of Medical Practitioners on the ground that it violates the equality clause under the Constitution.2. Petitioners in the present cases are Medical Practitioners having standing of more than five years in the profession. They are practising in District Head Quarters like Karwar, Taluka Head Quarter, Honnavar (Uttara Kannada District), and Bangalore Urban Agglomeration. The first petitioner in Writ Petition No. 32120 of 1993 is the Association of Medical Practitioners.3. The contention raised on behalf of the petitioners is that the measure adopted under the Act for prescribing the rate of tax is arbitrary in as much as the same could have been prescribed only on the basis of income earned by such medical practitioners a...
Smt. Doddamma Vs. Asstt. Commissioner and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-04-1996
Reported in: ILR1997KAR571
ORDERP. Vishwanatha Shetty, J.1. Though this petition is posted for preliminary hearing in 'B Group', with the consent of Learned Counsel appearing for the parties, it is taken up for final hearing and disposed of by this order.2. The petitioner, who is the widow of one late Doddaiah, has filed this petition challenging order dated 2nd January 1990 passed by the second respondent confirming order dated 29th March 1983 passed by the first respondent. Copies of the orders passed by respondents 1 and 2 have been produced as Annexure-B and C respectively.3. The brief facts of the case, which are relevant for the disposal of this petition, may be stated as follows:The husband of the petitioner, late Doddaiah, was granted land measuring 4 acres in Survey No. 52 of Matakere village, H.D. Kote Taluk, Mysore District, by means of order dated 25th April 1953, Out of the said land, an extent of 1 acre was sold to the third respondent and another extent of 2 acres was sold to the 4th respondent, b...
P.M. Khode Vs. the State Bank of India and ors.
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-04-1996
Reported in: ILR1997KAR1236
ORDERH.L Dattu, J. 1. Petitioner was appointed as Clerk in respondent Bank in October 1967. He was promoted to the post of Head Clerk and later promoted to the post of Officer Grade-II and after vationalisation of posts and pay scales in 1979, he was place in the post of Officer, Junior Management Grade Scale-l. While posted as Officer, Junior Management Grade at Hospet Branch, Hospet, he was served with a charge sheet dated 21st January 1983, containing charges of misconduct as Clerk at Sambra Branch of respondent Bank. It was alleged in the said charge sheet that petitioner did not remit a sum of Rs.800/- handed over to him by Wg.Cdr. Bedded on 27.2.1978 for credit into his account and on 13.3.1978 had made fictitious credit entries in the Pass Book and ledger sheet as on 27.2.1978, by interlineations and had obtained the initials of the Branch Manager by falsely confirming that the petitioner had verified the relative Voucher. This was first charge sheet. Petitioner, while working a...
Workmen of Manipal Power Press Vs. Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribu ...
Court: Karnataka
Decided on: Jun-03-1996
Reported in: ILR1997KAR448
Kumar Rajaratnam, J.1. The Writ Petition is taken up with the consent of parties.2. The petitioner-union representing 64 workmen seeks to challenge the legal validity of the order passed by the Industrial Tribunal dated 13.12.1995. The Government of Karnataka by its order dated 10/01.1983 held that an Industrial Dispute exists between the petitioner and the management of respondents 2 and 3 and made a reference to the Industrial Tribunal on the following points of dispute:'Are the 64 workmen as detailed in the Annexure appended to this Government Order working in the Manipal Power Press, Manipal represented by the Manipal Printers and Publishers employees Association, Udupi, justified in demanding that they should also to be considered as employees (News paper Employees) of the Manipal Publishers and Printers (P) Ltd., Manipal, from the date of their appointments with will consequential benefits arising out of various wages Board recommendations and awards for journalists',If not, to w...