Karnataka Court January 2006 Judgments

The Divisional Commissioner and anr. Vs. H.K. Shivashankaraiah

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2006(1)KarLJ487

ORDERR. Gururajan, J.1. The Divisional Commissioner and the Joint Director of Public Instructions are before us challenging the order dated 12-9-2001 made in Application No. 4932 of 1996 by the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal (for short, 'the Tribunal').2. Facts in brief are as follows. -- The Joint Director of Public Instructions called for the names of eligible candidates from the employment exchange for appointment as Assistant Master, Grade II in High Schools in 1994. The District Employment Exchange sponsored the names of eligible candidates along with the names of the respondent. Respondent sought for appointment under category - Backward Class Group 'B'. According to him, his total income is less than Rs. 10,000/-. Respondent was selected for the post of Assistant Master. Appointment order was issued on 30-8-1994. After appointment, a certificate produced by the respondent claiming Backward Class Group 'B' was sent for verification to the District Caste and Income Verification...

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Andhra Pradesh Yarn Combines (P) Ltd.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: (2006)200CTR(Kar)641; ILR2006KAR3067; [2006]282ITR490(KAR); [2006]282ITR490(Karn)

H.L. Dattu, J.1. At the instance of the Revenue, the Tribunal has referred a question of law for our consideration and decision arising out of the orders passed in ITA No. 1876/Bang/1988, dt. 31st Oct., 1995 [reported at Andhra Pradesh Yarn Combines (P) Ltd v. ITO (1996) 55 TTJ (Bang) 237-Ed.].2. The ITO for the assessment year, namely, 1978-79 had levied a penalty of Rs. 95,000 after completion of the assessment proceedings for the relevant assessment year by invoking the provisions under Section 271(1)(c) of the IT Act, 1961 ('Act' for short), on the ground, that though the assessee is the owner and in possession of high denomination notes of the value of Rs. 1,35,000, has not recorded the same in the books of account maintained by him and has failed to offer any explanation about the nature and source of acquisition of money and, therefore, the said amount is 'unexplained money' and concealed income for the relevant assessment year. The levy of penalty is confirmed by the CIT(A), by...

Sumaira Fatima Vs. State by K.G. Halli Police Station

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2006CriLJ1837; 2006(104)ECC21; 2006LC21(Karnataka); ILR2006KAR1040; 2006(1)KarLJ584

ORDERV. Jagannathan, J.1. The petitioner, a Pakistani National, is before this Court in this petition under Section 482 of the Cr. P.C. praying setting aside the order dated 13-9-2005 passed by the 12th Additional Sessions Judge, Bangalore, in Cri. R.P. No. 15014 of 2005, refusing to set aside the order dated 10-2-2005 passed by the Traffic Court I, Bangalore, in C.C. No. 437 of 2004, rejecting the application for discharge of the petitioner.2. The facts giving raise to this petition briefly stated are to the effect that the petitioner, being a Pakistani national, came to India on 11-6-2004 and she was permitted to stay upto 25-7-2004. The Inspector of Police, Kadugondanahalli Police Station, found that the petitioner had overstayed till 28-7-2004 without having a proper residential permit and, therefore, he submitted PIR and a case was registered in FIR No. 288 of 2004 for the offence under Clause 7(2) of the Foreigners Order, 1948 read with Section 14 of the Foreigners Act, 1946. Fol...

R.C. Shankregowda Vs. the Divisional Controller, Karnataka State Road ...

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: [2006(109)FLR330]; ILR2006KAR979; 2006(1)KarLJ588

ORDERMohan Shantanagoudar, J.1. Heard the learned Counsels appearing on behalf of both the parties and perused the material on record.It is alleged that on 28-11-1995 at 6.30 a.m. when petitioner was conducting the KSRTC, bus plying on route Hosavaranchi to Mysore, he failed to issue tickets to 12 passengers despite collecting fare and that he had not collected the fare from 18 passengers and not issued tickets to them. Based on the said charge, he was subjected to domestic enquiry. In the said enquiry, the charges were held to be proved. The Disciplinary Authority based on the enquiry report and after applying its mind independently to the facts of the case dismissed the workman from service. The workman raised an industrial dispute under Section 10(4-A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ('ID. Act' for short) before the Labour Court, wherein it is held that the departmental enquiry conducted against the workman was fair and proper and that the charges are proved. Consequently, the ...

Balappa Vs. the Assistant Commissioner and anr.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2006(2)KarLJ125

ORDERN.K. Patil, J.1. The petitioner, questioning the legality and validity of the order dated 30th April, 2005 bearing No. KLR.CR. 67/2002-03 on the file of the first respondent, vide Annexure-A, has presented the instant writ petition. OR in the alternative has prayed for regrant of the property bearing R.S. No. 125/3 of Kannolli Village of Jamkhandi Taluk measuring 2 acres which had been vested in the Government in pursuance of the order of the Assistant Commissioner by considering the proviso of Section 5(4) of the Karnataka Village Offices Abolition Act, 1961, as per the representation/application filed by petitioner dated 28th August, 2003 vide Annexure-H, without dispossessing him from the land in question and as per the direction issued by this Court on 8th December, 2003 in the earlier round of litigation in Writ Petition No. 39295 of 2003.2. It is not in dispute that, petitioner had earlier filed a writ petition in W.P. No. 39295 of 2003 assailing the correctness of the order...

M. Munivenkatappa Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2006(2)KarLJ40

R. Gururajan, J.1. Appellant is before us challenging the order passed in the W.P. Nos. 51319 and 51320 of 2003, dated 24-5-2004 in this appeal.2. Kothanur Village Panchayat comprises of Kothanur Village, Raghavanapalya, Jambusavari Dinne, Ashraya Colony, Harinagara and Vaddarapalya. The Kothanur Village comprises of Survey Nos. 1 to 80 measuring in all 1214 acres 37 guntas, Raghavanapalya Village comprises of Sy, Nos. 1 to 37 measuring about 127 acres 33 guntas. The other two villages namely Jambusavari Dinne and Ashraya Colony do not have any agricultural lands annexed to them. Respondent 6-Panchayat comes under the Bangalore District Zilla Panchayat, Elections to the 6th respondent-Panchayat were held in February 2000. The term of the elected body of the sixth respondent is entitled to continue till the term of 5 years is complete. By virtue of the order dated 18-11-2003 passed by the 4th respondent, the term provided to the elected body of the 6th respondent Panchayat is being ille...

A. Sudhakar Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: 2006(2)KarLJ253

ORDERN.K. Patil, J.1. The petitioner, being aggrieved by the order dated 31st October, 1989 in Appeal No. LRA.(TT) 1816/86 MAN on the file of the District Land Reforms Appellate Authority, Dakshina Kannada, Mangalore, allowing and setting aside the order passed by 11th Land Tribunal, Mangalore, Dakshina Kannada in LRT.(VSL.38), dated 17th October, 1981, has presented the instant revision petition.2. The petitioner claiming to be tenant and cultivating the land along with his family members in land bearing Sy. No. 381/2 measuring 22 scents from the year 1926 as tenants and that, they are paying 'geni' to the third respondent herein regularly, had filed Form 7 for registration of occupancy rights in respect of the lands in question. The said application had come up for consideration before the 11th Land Tribunal, Mangalore on 17th October, 1981 and the Land Tribunal, Mangalore, after conducting enquiry, has conferred the occupancy rights in favour of petitioner. Assailing the correctness...

C.Y. Illur and anr. Vs. High Court of Karnataka and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: ILR2006KAR959; 2006(1)KarLJ480

ORDERN. Kumar, J.1. Petitioners in all these writ petitions were working as District and Sessions Judges at various places. They have challenged in these writ petitions the impugned order retiring them from service on their attaining the age of 58 years in terms of Rule 95-A of the Karnataka Civil Services Rules, 1958 as amended by the Karnataka Civil Services (First Amendment) Rules, 1997 which is made retrospective from 1st January, 1993. They have also challenged the vires of this amended Rule on the ground that it is ultra vires as being contrary to the law declared by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India.2. The Supreme Court in the case of All India Judges' Association v. Union of India and Ors. : (1993)ILLJ723SC which is for short known as the 'First Judges' case', has held that the age of retirement of Judicial Officers should be 60 years. They issued a direction to all the States and Union Territories to make appropriate alterations under the Rules, in respect of judicial service...

Venkataramanappa Vs. G. Srinivasa and ors.

Court: Karnataka

Reported in: II(2006)ACC739; 2007ACJ2803; 2006(2)KarLJ477

K. Sreedhar Rao, J.1. Sri A.M. Venkatesh and Sri M.S. Mandanna, learned Counsels are directed to take notice for respondents 9 and 11 respectively and permitted to file their vakalaths within two months.2. The petitioners in M.V.C. No. 984 of 1990 are awarded compensation for the death of one Nagaraj. The Tribunal directed the owner to pay the compensation. The claim against the insurer is dismissed. The owner is in appeal. The note discloses that the policy was issued by the insurer and cover note on 10-4-1990 against the payment of cheque. The cheque was dishonoured on 16-4-1990. The insurer intimated the fact of dishonour and cancelled the policy. The insured had taken the fresh policy with effect from 30-4-1990, The accident occurred on 26-4-1990. The facts clearly disclose that the earlier cover note and the policy issued came to be cancelled for dishonour of the cheque. Therefore, the insured took a fresh policy subsequent to the accident.3. The contention of the appellant that t...

Sri N.R. Umesh S/O Late N. Rama Nayak and Sri B. Krishnappa S/O Sri By ...

Court: Karnataka

ORDER1. The 1st petitioner is the Assistant Secretary, Dakshina Kannada Zilla Panchayat, Mangalore, and the 2nd petitioner is the Assistant Secretary, Bangalore urban Zilla Panchayat, Bangalore. The dispute in this writ petition relates to inter se seniority between the petitioners and respondents 2 to 16 and their rival claims for promotion to the higher cadre.2. According to the petitioners, they were promoted as Block Development Officers (B.D.Os.) before respondents 2 to 16 were directly recruitedas B.D.OS. It is also stated that the petitioners were promoted as Executive officers before respondents 2 to 16 were promoted to the cadre of Executive Officers. When the final seniority list of B.D.Os. was published on 27.10.2001, respondents 2 to 16 were ranked above the petitioners, challenging the said final seniority list of B.D.Os., the petitioners filed Application Nos. 4739-4740/02 in the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal which is still pending. There is no order staying the opera...