Nominal Index: Rajkumar And The State Of Karnataka 2022 Livelaw (Kar) 122 WE CARE CHARITABLE TRUST v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 123 Lakshmikanta and Other v. State of Karnataka, 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 124 Ms Padmavathi Subramaniyan v The Ministry Of Civil Aviation 2022 Livelaw (Kar) 125 Dr. UMESH P.G v. CENTRAL COUNCIL OF INDIAN MEDICINE 2022 LiveLaw...
Rajkumar And The State Of Karnataka 2022 Livelaw (Kar) 122
WE CARE CHARITABLE TRUST v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 123
Lakshmikanta and Other v. State of Karnataka, 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 124
Ms Padmavathi Subramaniyan v The Ministry Of Civil Aviation 2022 Livelaw (Kar) 125
Dr. UMESH P.G v. CENTRAL COUNCIL OF INDIAN MEDICINE 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 126
VASANTH ADITHYA. J v. STATE BY KARNATAKA 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 127
Mohamed Ikbal v. Secretary to the Government of India 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 128
Karnataka State Legal Services Authority v. State Of Karnataka 2022 Livelaw (Kar) 129
K Srinivas V The Karnataka State Election Commission 2022 Livelaw (Kar) 130
Shanthi Nikethan High Court v other v. State of Karnataka 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 131
P Balaji Babu v. State Bank of India 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 132
Judgments/Orders/Reports
Case Title: Rajkumar And The State Of Karnataka Case No: Criminal Petition No.6118 Of 2021
Citation: 2022 Livelaw (Kar) 122
The Karnataka High Court has said that Section 370 of the Indian Penal Code cannot be invoked merely on the presumption that an accused indulged himself in human trafficking. A Single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna while quashing criminal proceedings initiated against one Rajkumar said, "What can be gathered from the complaint and the chargesheet that is filed by the police is that, it is presumed that the petitioner had indulged himself in human trafficking and therefore, Section 370 of the IPC was invoked against the petitioner."
Case Title: WE CARE CHARITABLE TRUST v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 1682/2022
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 123
The Karnataka High Court has said that applications filed before authorities seeking approval for upgradation of the schools should be decided in a time bound manner as the applications are filed for specific academic year and if the decision making authorities take too long a time for disposing of the applications, the academic year itself would have been over rendering the applications irrelevant or infructuous.
Case Title: Lakshmikanta and Other v. State of Karnataka Case No: WP 4457/2022
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 124
The Karnataka High Court while upholding the constitutional validity of Article 243R (2)(a) of the Constitution has reiterated that nominated members to the Municipal Council shall not have right to vote in the meeting of the Council.
A division bench of Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice S Vishwajith Shetty, while dismissing a petition filed by six nominated councillors of the Malur Town Municipal Council said, "The elected members of the Council are chosen by popular vote and carry with them, the mandate of the people, whereas, nominated members of the Council are appointed as Councillors. The elected members and nominated members cannot be said to be belonging to the same class and there is no pleading that differentiation between elected and nominated members is either unreasonable or is arbitrary or that it does not rest on any rational basis. In view of aforesaid enunciation of law, challenge to the validity of Article 243R (2) (a) that it violates Article 14 of the Constitution of India, fails."
Case Title: Ms Padmavathi Subramaniyan v The Ministry Of Civil Aviation Case No: Writ Petition No.21448 Of 2021
Citation: 2022 Livelaw (Kar) 125
The Karnataka High Court has said that since Air India Limited is now a private Company owned by M/s.Talace Pvt. Ltd., the grievance of the employees can be redressed only before the competent authority which can deal with the question and not under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. A single judge bench of Justice R Devdas made the observation while dismissing a petition filed by petitioner Padmavathi Subramaniyan and two other employees of Air India Limited. The petitioner had approached the court with a grievance in matter of seniority.
Case Title: Dr. UMESH P.G v. CENTRAL COUNCIL OF INDIAN MEDICINE Case No: W.A.No.148/2021
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 126
The Karnataka High Court has upheld the notification dated June 25, 2010 issued by the Union Ministry of Health and Family Welfare by which it de-recognize all the "Vaidya Vidwan" certificates awarded by the Andhra Ayurvedic Parishad from 1975 till 2010 as invalid.
6: Law Intern Allegedly Assaulted At Law Firm: Karnataka High Court Refuses To Quash FIR
Case Title: VASANTH ADITHYA. J v. STATE BY KARNATAKA Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3167/2022
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 127
The Karnataka High Court recently refused to quash a case registered by the police against an Advocate under various sections of the Indian Penal Code and Information Technology Act, 2000, on a complaint filed by a Law Intern.
Case Title: Mohamed Ikbal v. Secretary to the Government of India. Case No: WP 5821/2021
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 128
The Karnataka High Court has directed the Central and State Governments to ensure proper implementation of schemes launched for providing housing to eligible siteless/houseless urban and rural BPL/EWS families belonging to various categories of weaker sections of the society.
8. After Nudge From High Court, Karnataka Govt Installs MRI Scanning Machine At DIMHANS
Case Title: Karnataka State Legal Services Authority v. State Of Karnataka Case No: WP 18741/1996
Citation: 2022 Livelaw (Kar) 129
The Karnataka Government on Thursday informed the High Court that an M.R.I scanning machine has been installed and made operational at the Dharwad Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences (DIMHANS).
A division bench of Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi and Justice S R Krishna took on record the compliance affidavit filed by the government stating that installation of the MRI Scanning machine is complete and trial runs are in progress and even the Medical Superintendent has been appointed.
Case Title: K Srinivas V The Karnataka State Election Commission Case No: Writ Petition No.3415 Of 2022
Citation: 2022 Livelaw (Kar) 130
The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a petition filed by four persons challenging the order passed by the Karnataka State Election Commission disqualifying them from continuing as the elected members of the Municipality, on failure to lodge a true and correct account of electoral expenditure with the Returning Officer, within prescribed time.
10. Display School Name In SSLC Certificate Issued To Students: Karnataka High Court To State
Case Title: Shanthi Nikethan High Court v other v. State of Karnataka Case No: WP 6532/2022
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 131
The Karnataka High Court has directed the state government and other respondents to show the names of the schools, whose recognition was withdrawn in the middle of academic year, in S.S.L.C. marks card of the students.
Case Title: P Balaji Babu v. State Bank of India Case No: WRIT PETITION NO.46450 OF 2014
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 132
The Karnataka High Court has directed State Bank Of India to refund the amount forfeited by it from a prospective purchaser of a property being sold under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI) as it did not disclose that title of the subject property was not with the original borrower of the loan.
Other Reports
Case Title: Mohammed Arif Jameel v. State Of Karnataka Case No: WP 508/2021
The Karnataka High Court on Monday modified its earlier order dated January 21, 2021 and permitted the state government to implement Section 5 (Restriction on transport of cattle) of the Karnataka Prevention of Slaughter and Preservation of Cattle Act, 2020 and rules framed thereunder.
Case Title: PROJECT VRUKSHA FOUNDATION v. STATE BOARD FOR WILDLIFE (SBWL) Case No: WP 8067/2020
The Karnataka High Court on Wednesday directed the National Board for Wildlife to get the necessary approvals if required from the National Tiger Conservation Authority and under the Forest Conservation Act and thereafter carry out a survey and make an assessment of the effect of laying down a railway line between Hubballi and Ankola on wildlife.