High Court of Karnataka Hears Batch of Writ Petitions Against Order of Karnataka Administrative Tribunal in Transport Department Recruitment Dispute. Petitioners Challenged the Tribunal's Interim Order Dated 02.03.2010 Passed in Application Nos.1212-1250/2010.

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: BENGALURU
  • 54
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Issue of Consideration

KAHC010075332010_1

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Case Details

2014 LawText (KAR) (09) 29

WRIT PETITION Nos.6842-6880/2010 (S-KAT) C/W WP Nos.15002/2011, 21131-21146/2011, 16948-16995/2010, 8215/2010, 8715/2010, 8906/2010, 10106/2010, 12726-12763/2010, 17294-17327/2010, 17481/2010, 17485-17490/2010, 17723-17727/2010, 19401/2011, 21520-21530/2011, 24525/2010, 41905-41908/2010, 6747-6758/2011, 908-911/2011, 103593/2014, 103620-103657/2014

2014-09-23

D.H. Waghela, Chief Justice, H.G. Ramesh, Justice

H. Subramanya Jois, K.C. Shanthakumar, Madhusudan R. Naik, Ravindra D.K., J. Prashanth, Ravivarma Kumar Associates, S.M. Babu, C.M. Nagabhushan, P.V. Chandrashekar, H. Kantharaj, V. Lakshminarayan, L. Vijayakumar, D.N. Nanjundareddy, Nityanand

Mahesh A C & Ors. (Petitioners in WP 6842-6880/2010) and other connected petitioners

The State of Karnataka & Ors.

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

Nature of Litigation

Writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 challenging an interim order of Karnataka Administrative Tribunal

Remedy Sought

Quashing of the KAT order dated 02.03.2010 in Application Nos.1212-1250/2010 and proceedings culminating in the same

Previous Decisions

Karnataka Administrative Tribunal order dated 02.03.2010 in Application Nos.1212-1250/2010

Procedural History

The petitioners filed writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution challenging the KAT order dated 02.03.2010. Some petitioners were deleted as per order dated 05.03.2010. Respondent No.42 impleaded as per order dated 17.06.2010.

Acts & Sections

  • Constitution of India: Article 226, Article 227
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Hears Appeal Against Vacation of Interim Injunction in 'RACIRAFT' vs 'ESIRAFT' Trademark Case. The Court Examines Whether the Impugned Mark 'ESIRAFT' is Deceptively Similar to the Registered Mark 'RACIRAFT' for Pharmaceutical Produc...
Related Judgement
High Court High Court Quashes Proceedings Against Doctor in Manual Scavengers Act Case — No Prima Facie Case as Petitioner was not Employer of Deceased. Alleged Offence Under Sections 7 and 9 of the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Reh...