PETITIONER IN THE
SAID APPLICATION AND DIRECT THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO
REGULARIZE THE LEAVE PERIOD OF THE APPLICANT AS
PERIOD SPENT ON DUTY AND ADJUST
case, there is no withdrawal of the
special leave petition, on the other hand, the
special leave petition is dismissed after hearing
the learned counsel ... prosecuting this special
leave petition before the Hon'ble Supreme
Court. The Judges who passed the judgment in
the regular first appeal have since
Karnataka Power Transmission ... vs Muizz Ahmad Shariff on 23 January, 2025
-1-
WA No. 861
Bangalore Electricity Supply Company ... vs Kumari Chandana K on 23 January, 2025
-1-
WA No
Smt Jayanthi S Shetty vs State Of Karnataka on 29 October, 2025
Author: Suraj Govindaraj
Karnataka Power Transmission ... vs Mrs. Rekha on 23 January, 2025
-1-
WA No. 861 of
Smt Jayanthi S Shetty vs State Of Karnataka on 29 October, 2025
Author: Suraj Govindaraj
respondent/plaintiff-Mutt that the judgment of this Court in
Regular Second Appeal No.100446 of 2015 decided on 03rd
July, 2024 has been challenged ... leave has been granted by
the Hon'ble Supreme Court and therefore, the finding in the
judgment of this Court in Regular Second Appeal
regularization must not be
considered. In the contempt, the petitioner has accepted the
arrears of salary without demur. Therefore, the claim for
regularization is deemed ... would leave the decision to the hands of the
Court as they have recommended the case of the petitioner for
regularization during his service itself
regular pay scale of Gardeners, while allowing
future consideration of their regularization if
permissible by law.
4. Both the Appellant Workmen and the Respondent
Employer ... Special Leave Petitions. The workmen primarily
seek full reinstatement with back wages and a
direction to secure their regularization, whereas
the Respondent Employer seeks