Trending :
Lawtext
Search
Login / Register
Sign In
HomeJudgement
Scroll Down To Discover
High Court

KAHC030058312022_1

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: KALABURAGI
Admin
2026-10-24 21:53:19
  • 92
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Issue of Consideration

KAHC030058312022_1

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Case Details

2024 LawText (KAR) (06) 1

W.A. No.200147 of 2022

2024-06-25

H.T. Narendra Prasad, K. V. Aravind

S.S. Naganand, Sudarshan M., P. Vilaskumar, Nitesh Padiyal

Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited & Others

Andanswamy

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Service regularization dispute between electricity supply company and workers

Remedy Sought

Appellants (employer) seek to set aside single judge orders directing regularization of services; employees seek regularization from date of original appointment

Filing Reason

Challenging single judge orders in writ petitions regarding regularization of services

Previous Decisions

Single Judge orders in various writ petitions, including order dated 27.06.2022 in W.P.No.200099/2018, directing regularization of services (as per employer's appeal prayer to set aside)

Procedural History

Writ petitions filed by individuals seeking regularization of services in electricity supply companies. Learned Single Judge passed orders in 2018 and 2021/2022 directing regularization. These writ appeals filed under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961, challenging those orders.

Acts & Sections

  • Karnataka High Court Act, 1961: 4
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Tags :
service regularization writ appeal power transmission electricity supply meter reader Karnataka High Court Act

Pay once for this file or subscribe for unlimited downloads

Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Landowners' Petition for Redetermination of Compensation Under National Highways Act — Limitation Period for Section 3G(5) Application Computed from Date of Knowledge of Award, Not from Notice Under Section 3H. 2026-11-05 03:40:52
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Upholds Employees' Right to Bonus Under Payment of Bonus Act, 1965 — Clarifies Applicability Despite Authorised Controller Appointment. 2026-11-05 03:40:44
Categories
Popular Tags
writ petition Murder acquittal natural justice Compensation burden of proof land acquisition jurisdiction limitation circumstantial evidence
Follow Us

Bombay High Court Allows Appeals by Acquiring Body in Land Acquisition Compensation Cases,...

Bombay High Court Dismisses NHAI Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Dispute — Upho...

Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Concurrent Findings in Suit for Spec...

High Court of Judicature at Bombay Upholds Developer's Challenge to Arbitration Award — ...

High Court Quashes School Tribunal's Order on Employee Reinstatement Due to Procedural Irr...

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction and Death Sentence in POCSO Case Due to Credible Testimon...

Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal Against High Court's Reversal of Trial Court's Decree on Wi...

Supreme Court Expunges Adverse Remarks Against Police Officer in Preventive Detention Case...

Supreme Court Quashes FIR in Dowry Death Case Due to Lack of Evidence and Abuse of Process...

Supreme Court Allows Recruitment Appeal in Police Constable Case Due to Flawed Medical Ass...

Lost Your Password?