Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (1.06 seconds)

K.N.Ravi vs The Registrar on 13 October, 2020

2. On perusal of the records, it is evident that the petitioner is a Government servant and hence the present petition is not maintainable. Accordingly, the writ petition stands transferred to the State Administrative Tribunal in view of the decision in the case of Mr. M.S.SUBBE GOWDA vs. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, STATE OF KARNATAKA (Writ Petition No.4090/2012 D.D. 07-01-2015) read with the decision in the case of B.SURESH vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS 4 reported in 2002(5)Kar.L.J.202(DB). Extract of para Nos.8 & 9 are reproduced hereunder:-
Karnataka High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - P B Bajanthri - Full Document

R T Pushpa vs State Of Karnataka on 13 October, 2020

2. On perusal of the records, it is evident that the petitioner is a Government servant and hence the present petition is not maintainable. Accordingly, the writ petition stands transferred to the State Administrative Tribunal in view of the decision in the case of Mr. M.S.SUBBE GOWDA vs. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, STATE OF KARNATAKA (Writ Petition No.4090/2012 D.D. 07-01-2015) read with the decision in the case of B.SURESH vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS reported in 2002(5)Kar.L.J.202(DB). Extract of para Nos.8 & 9 are reproduced hereunder:-
Karnataka High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - P B Bajanthri - Full Document

K K Girish vs State Of Karnataka Represented By Its on 23 October, 2020

In view of the decision of the Apex Court in the case of L.Chandra Kumar vs. Union of India reported in (1997) 3 SCC 261 and also decisions of this Court in the case of Sri.Shivaprasad Biradar vs. Karnataka Lokayukta and others in W.A.No.200715/2018 (S-DE), B.Suresh Vs. State of Karnataka and others reported in 2002(5) KLJ 202 (DB) and in the case of Sri.B.Suresh Vs. State of Karnataka and others, the division bench in Paragraphs 8 and 9 of its decision has held as under:-
Karnataka High Court Cites 9 - Cited by 0 - P B Bajanthri - Full Document
1