Karnataka High Court Weekly Round-Up: November 27 To December 3, 2023

Citations: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 450 To 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 457Nominal Index:Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited & Other And Mallikarjun Savanur. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 450The Deputy Director General & FAA Central Public Information Officer & Another AND P Lavanya & Another. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 451H V Ashok And H N Gopal and Other. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 452Ganesh V v. State of Karnataka. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 453D. K. Shivakumar And State of Karnataka & Others. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 454Dr. C. Vishwanath Reddy & Another v. The Commissioner BBMP & Another. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 455Manimala @Roopa AND K Satish Kumar. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 456Harish B T And Life Insurance Corporation of India 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 457PC Act | Proceedings By Third Parties Not Judicial Proceedings, Employer Cannot Withhold Pension On Such Grounds: Karnataka High CourtCase Title: Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited & Other And Mallikarjun SavanurCase No: Writ Appeal No. 100422 of 2023.Citation No. 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 450The Karnataka High Court has recently held that proceedings instituted by third parties against a government employee under the Prevention of Corruption Act ("PC Act"), cannot be construed to fall within the category of judicial proceedings, permitting the employer to withhold the pension of the retired employee.In dismissing an appeal by the Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited ("KPTCL") against an order of a single bench which allowed a plea by a KPTCL employee, seeking disbursal of all of his retirement benefits, a Division bench of Justice S Sunil Dutt Yadav and Justice Vijaykumar A Patil observed, “The judicial proceedings instituted by third parties under the PC Act cannot be considered to be proceedings instituted under Regulation 171. Proceedings instituted by third parties cannot be construed to fall within the category of judicial proceedings permitting the employer to withhold the pension of the employee.”Marriage Does Not Eclipse Right To Individual Privacy, Autonomy: Karnataka High Court On Wife's RTI Seeking Husband's Aadhar DetailsCase Title: The Deputy Director General & FAA Central Public Information Officer & Another AND P Lavanya & Another.Case No: WRIT APPEAL NO. 100406 OF 2023Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 451The Karnataka High Court has set aside an order of a single bench which directed the UIDAI to issue notice of hearing to an Aadhar card holder whose wife had filed an RTI application seeking personal Aadhar information, such as his address of service in order to enforce an order of maintenance.The single bench had directed the Assistant Director General, Central Public Information Officer, UIDAI, to hold a hearing/inquiry and decide whether the husband's Aadhar details could be divulged to his wife.Provide Form For Candidates To Disclose Pending Criminal Cases During Nomination Process: Karnataka High Court To State Election CommissionCase Title: H V Ashok And H N Gopal and OtherCase No: Writ Appeal No. 1249 of 2023Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 452The Karnataka High Court has directed the State Election Commission and other Agencies associated with the election process to implement directions given by the Apex Court pertaining to providing a form in which the contesting candidates are to declare their involvement in pending criminal cases, if any.The petitioner's election had been annulled by the Election Tribunal on the ground that he had failed to disclose pending criminal cases against him, and such annulment was upheld by a single bench of the High Court.Karnataka High Court Quashes Child Marriage Case, Holds Criminal Proceedings Against Accused-Husband Not In Interest Of Survivor And ChildCase Title: Ganesh V v. State of Karnataka,Case No: W.P. No. 13600/2023Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 453The Karnataka High Court has quashed the criminal case initiated against a man (petitioner) for offences punishable u/s 9, 10 and 11 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006, taking note of the survivor's plea that she and her child depended on him and the prosecution would not be in the interest of justice.The survivor had appeared before the court and pleaded that the petitioner was the sole breadwinner of the family. She claimed that if the criminal proceedings were allowed to be continued and the petitioner incarcerated, she and her child would be put to more agony and misery rather than securing the ends of justice.Disproportionate Assets Case: High Court Permits DK Shivakumar To Withdraw Challenge After Karnataka Govt Withdraws Consent For CBI ProbeCase Title: D. K. Shivakumar And State of Karnataka & Others.Case No: WA 646 of 2023.Citation No: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 454Subsequent to the Karnataka government withdrawing consent accorded to the CBI, the High Court today permitted Deputy CM DK Shivakumar to withdraw his petition and appeal challenging the consent to prosecute him given to CBI in the disproportionate assets case.A Division Bench of Chief Justice PB Varale and...

Karnataka High Court Weekly Round-Up: November 27 To December 3, 2023

Mustafa Plumber

Tags