{"id":174256,"date":"2009-06-22T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-06-21T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/niyaz-ahamed-sharieff-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-22-june-2009"},"modified":"2014-05-20T21:56:22","modified_gmt":"2014-05-20T16:26:22","slug":"niyaz-ahamed-sharieff-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-22-june-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/niyaz-ahamed-sharieff-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-22-june-2009","title":{"rendered":"Niyaz Ahamed Sharieff vs The Principal Secretary on 22 June, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Niyaz Ahamed Sharieff vs The Principal Secretary on 22 June, 2009<\/div>\n
Author: S.Abdul Nazeer<\/div>\n
 \n\nxxx: ':'1-;;:\u00ab; men comm or' KARNATAKA   \"\n\nDATED Tms THE 22\"\" DAY OF Ji;II%f2cai}9     I\" * '\n\nBEFORE  % Q\nTHEHON'BLE MR.JUs2f1C.': S.VA.z1\u00a7IjUl;--NA2'.I3ERv... \n\nWRIT PETITION Nc}.;356s,2\u00a2i0:: (52:23).  V\n\nBetween:\n\nNiyaz, Ahamed sharie\ufb01;   ..  % M\n\nS223 lav: Ibrahirn   V. \nAged about 54.y\u00a3:ars,TA * . 31;;   \nAssistant Manager {_PLi1ciaa\u00a7es) \u00a7:'\u20ac3, \"~ . __\n\nKamataka Siik\ufb01g\/Iarketing \nCubbeupet MainRoad, _ A\nSilk Exchange Building; -_\nBangaicre M\u00bb-;560_GO2. ~ V ' \"\n\n. . .. ?et\u00a3ti0ner.\n\n     ..... \n<\/pre>\n
L 12:e%g=rmeipaa%s\u00a2cm:ary,
\nx_ Conunerm: & Industries Depaxtxnaant,<\/p>\n
. V. 4 44 ‘ = _ V’ M.S.BJdgs., Sachivalaya,<\/p>\n
%  ‘ Ba_nga_Iore – see 09:.\n<\/p>\n
_ ” The Board afDire-ctors,
\n ‘  ‘Karnataka Siik Marketing Beard,
\n* Mysugar Buifdings, 2″” Fleur,
\nIC. Road, Bangalore – 2,
\nReptd. By its Managing Director.\n<\/p>\n
3 The Managing Director,
\nKamataka Silk Marketing Board,
\nNiysugar Buildings, 2″” Floor,<\/p>\n
J.C. Road, Bangalore — 2. 2 . .\n<\/p>\n
(By Sri T.P. Srinivas, AGAfor R1,.  _
\nM\/s S.N.Murthy, AIS, Advs. fQ}”‘R2 8};  –.  <\/p>\n
This  ‘P\u00e9\ufb01ti\u00e9iji is \ufb01fijed tinder A_*1′”iC}’6SV 226 & 227 of the
\nConstituiion, pr3ying_to ‘qz23sh”\ufb021e ‘imj:r11_g31ed order dated 23.7.2008
\nissued by R}. andthe\u00e9 co:2seq:;”c.r1t’Tn.9ticg:”d_atcd 24.9.2008 issued by<\/p>\n
This um: Petitionagririing tun ibr Orders this day, the Court
\nmz:_u:,~!r;-‘;~t1}_e fo\ufb01\ufb01xwiing;  H  —– -A ”<\/p>\n
 i  ORDER<\/p>\n
m;ga   is posted 12:\u00bb: Orders, by consent ofthe<\/p>\n
_  \u00a33:  partiw, it is taken up for final hearing and<\/p>\n
   order.\n<\/p>\n
   this ease, the petitioner has challenged the directisn<\/p>\n
 -issgz\u00e9d:  the first respondent to the second respondent dated<\/p>\n
he<\/p>\n
23.7.2008 (Annexure ‘K’) to recover a sum of Rs.70,83,958;?\u00a2:.””\u00bb..<\/p>\n
towards the iess alleged to have been caused by the petitio_z;~e;*-   ” <\/p>\n
the show cause notice at Annexere ‘L’ issued hy_.1h,e_: _ 3<\/p>\n
respondent dated 24.9.2008 whereby the   X. <\/p>\n
proposed to review the order of theV.di\u00a7.cipii\u00a7\u00a7a1’e;\u20ac”authori’i*y:V <\/p>\n
24.3.2007 imposing penislnneni of wiiiiiieidizig ih”er”_vV:inerezi\u00e9.en1s
\nwith eumeiative effect. I i A A A H<\/p>\n
3. The petitieiier Wang as’f\u00e9\u00ab\u00a5a;;ch O\ufb01ieer efthe<\/p>\n
Kamaiaka   short ‘Bear\u00e9’). He was\ufb01kept
\nunder suspensiee\u00e9ieia  enquiry. He was issued<\/p>\n
with a Show ._cau.<ie "\u00bbx2etiee e\u00e9ith. \ufb01ve articles. ef charges dated<\/p>\n
 .?e'.\u00a3i1ir;ii1'eij teed eiiieepiy to the Show cause notice dated<\/p>\n
10.&_2.00Q..ii$ei.\u00a7e%:;ce,hth\u00e9;-disciplinary authority was not satis\ufb01ed with<\/p>\n
 ivthe rep\u00a7\u00a7\u00e9’;— an..e::qu~i:\u00ab_~,.\u00bb was ordered against him. A Retired District<\/p>\n
ei1.d.”Sees.i0nS””Jedge was appointed as an enquiry o\ufb01ieer. After<\/p>\n
 ‘a.n;enc{uiry, the enquiry office? subzni\ufb01 ed his report holding<\/p>\n
Vi  is guilty efall the five charges levelled against him.<\/p>\n
E<\/p>\n
The disciplinary authority issued a second show cause noticmfio    <\/p>\n
petitioner on 24.5.2896 and the reply was \ufb02ied by the  \u00ab.A 9<\/p>\n
6.7.2096. The Managhg Director of 1m__ mmgio \u00a7v;;5.%’as-  T<\/p>\n
discipiinaxy authority passed an order-giatecvfA2,4.8.2OG? ‘ :2 u<\/p>\n
Annexure ‘J’ withholding tour annual  xxtriiia-. ..;ooo1ni%i$ive
\ne\ufb01iect. It appears that the Chaio\ufb01\u00e9tx  noto oated
\n13.9.2007 {Annexure %m(b)}Vo:eo[%g\u00a2e\u00a7\u00abk like orders
\npassod by the    A copy
\nof the said zfzo\ufb01o   The State
\nGovetxzxnentigent  ~.i:3;v7?.20\u20ac}8 (Armexure ‘K’) to the<\/p>\n
Board opining  tho  0;; the potitioasr is on<\/p>\n
a lower s;i\u00a7\u00a7:i’\u00e9’Vai2,c\u00a5 ‘\u00a3hat”L’2o :i\\-“i&11zV\u00a7ging Dixecior had no: foiiowed the<\/p>\n
V.   issued by the Govermnent Whiie imposing<\/p>\n
 the  Government direote\u00e9 the Board to take<\/p>\n
 \ufb01ezps to :;\u20ac:Covi%1E.a”som of Rs.7{},83,958:’\u00ab~ from the petitioner and to<\/p>\n
  I ponioiimeni in proportion to the charges proveci. In<\/p>\n
K  pvJ:sti’a;1\u00a7\u00e97e’Aoi”{he said oornmunieation of 131:: State Government at<\/p>\n
n  ‘  A\ufb01\ufb01\u00e9\ufb01uro ‘K’, the Board has issuod a Show cause notice as per<\/p>\n
in<\/p>\n
Axmemnre ‘L’ \ufb01aied 24.9.2868 caiiitig upon the petitioner to show  <\/p>\n
cause as to why enhanced penalty in coimnenszzration wit}; \u00a313.   it<\/p>\n
nzisconduci shouid net be imposed on him andialsato    <\/p>\n
as to why the dues to the tune cf Rs.6i,.SV3,85$}’~V     A<\/p>\n
suffered by the Board on acczount of the     <\/p>\n
the petitioner should not be recoviaregi item’  *  “~ <\/p>\n
4. The respond\u00a7%ii’\u00a7;~;.._V1iaveliiilgd.:fiiei:i”‘\u00a7<\u00a7(i;:iiter"j'\u00a3{$ the writ
\npetition.\n<\/p>\n
5. Leain\u00e9d Ceuxisel  Wauld coniend that the
\nfirst respondent-Stzii\u00e9si  as power or authority to
\n ziigegwiizsgmg ‘”\u00a7)\u00a72’ A35 ‘n'”e;s:u:-e  directiiig the Board first<\/p>\n
rr:*vi\u00e9vz?:i:ig’_?.t’}:e piis\u00a7;ed by the disciplinary aistherity. it is<\/p>\n
  :.,,.\/;;;j\u00a3}’i3I16e\u20ac1′.I.iV1a’\u00a3 Thai  ofthe disciplinmy azzthority being quasi-<\/p>\n
” “–\u00a7\u00a31Lii;:i::%Ai:; nafuxf\u00e9; it sat; be reviewed only in ascordanee with law.<\/p>\n
   has 110 jurisdiciion to issue the Show cause netice<\/p>\n
 V..r\u00a23?i\u00a7ewing the earlier order of the dissipiinaiy authority.<\/p>\n
R<\/p>\n
V<\/p>\n
Leamed Counsel has made eiaborate subamssions on the  oi’ .   A<\/p>\n
the matter as well.   ‘<\/p>\n
6. On the other hand, ieamed   <\/p>\n
second 3:espondent-Board submits that the yetitioneft <\/p>\n
serious irregularities on account of  ou\ufb02ereci
\nhuge \ufb01nancial losses.   had
\nacted as the diseiplinzgry which
\nis not in propoxtirarto  is submitted that
\nfor the  5}; another eiiipioyee,
\nnameiy, Sri shaaih\u00e9’  disciplinary authority
\n of..dismiss.al as per the order dated<\/p>\n
 It is further contended that the<\/p>\n
 V ‘company is  Company and the Government has every<\/p>\n
_  to direet .tiie:_Board to set right the illegai orders passed by<\/p>\n
   authority. It is argued that the writ petition should<\/p>\n
 ‘ientertaineci as it is filed against a Show cause notice. The<\/p>\n
 i’ has to idle his repiy and contest the matter. The petitioner<\/p>\n
i’;\n<\/p>\n
\\m<\/p>\n
can even raise the objection as to the competence ofthe Board_4tnV_l<\/p>\n
review its order.\n<\/p>\n
7. I have carefully considered the arni1n1ents..n1ni\u00a7e1  <\/p>\n
learned Counsel at the Bar and  mtai\u00bb?-rlals  <\/p>\n
record.<\/p>\n
\n\n8. As rightly submitted   for the\nrespondents, this    writ petition\nchallenging    the present case, the\n<\/pre>\n
petitioner has   ilze show cause notice at
\nAnnexure   rnnpondmn bui also the dirnction
\n  Ain\u00e9\u00e9gngngnlgnz  \ufb01g} Annexure  whereby the Board<\/p>\n
was Aliigenled  Govazmnentz to recover a sum of<\/p>\n
‘_i7,83,958f- .i;i*o;n\u00ab:l\ufb02la petitinner towards the loss alleged to have<\/p>\n
l E\u00e9\u00e9nnllk\u00e9azlsegi by”  and also to impose punishment in proportion to<\/p>\n
 cnnnnitted by him. According tn the learner}<\/p>\n
   , _  for the petiiinner, neithnr the State Gevennnent nor the<\/p>\n
1′<\/p>\n
Beard has campetence to direct the  to   \u00e9.ga\u00a7ns\u00a77′<\/p>\n
petitianar as the order imp0singVpu;2isii1}1\u00e91’1tV_ A.z1gaizf:?.’;’V;v_%.1;}ie.  <\/p>\n
is a quasi judicia} erder passed   The V<\/p>\n
shew cause notice at Arm\u00e9xgre  \ufb01i\u00e9 Board to
\nthe petitioner as per the  under
\nAtmexure ‘K’?   ‘$13  Bentertain this writ
\npetition c>nl\u00a7\u00a7?4’V1;<"$\u00a5.\u20ac;z)':A1i\u00e9\u00e9"3\u00a2:%a=:1;: the State Govemment
\n\u00a30 issfi\u00e9   Viiazi\ufb01ate action against the
\npeiitioxg\u00e9r ii\ufb01d  Board to issue the Show cause
\nzzxiti\u00e9\ufb01 .35  'L' respectively.\n<\/p>\n
     T. ‘is in dispute their {ha Kaxnataka Silk Marketing<\/p>\n
 is a Govemineni cernpany. Articles of Association<\/p>\n
 0i”the”cgii;pany are 3:” Annexure ‘A’. The reievani Articies are 15,<\/p>\n
   18, which are as un\u00e9er:\n<\/p>\n
“I5. Subjeci {Q the provisions sf Ariicias I8 and 19<\/p>\n
harem), the business ofthe company shaii be managed<\/p>\n
\\<\/p>\n
10:\n<\/p>\n
may from time to time revoke, withdraw, alter or vary<\/p>\n
all or any of such pewers.\n<\/p>\n
18. Notwithstanding any thing eentainegi  ” e  A<\/p>\n
these articles, the Govemer may,.\u00bbi’ro_m time “e tinae,  ” ”<\/p>\n
subject to the Drovisicns ef the issue .   <\/p>\n
Directives as he may coixsider neeessztiy i1’1~..i*egard’to,_AA
\n\ufb01zsance, conduct. of the  et”   or
\nDirectors thereof and in 1i1ge~me:3;eer’    jgenul
\nany such     V give
\nimme\u00e9iate ”  V.  Se *issued by
\nmeans 1  ii ~ .  Boatd.  Meeting, passing
\nneeessziry resoliitiofasjiet and implementing<\/p>\n
the same by e3;eeutive*\u00abe’et.i\u00e9n,f’ < <\/p>\n
 it  -. 'git  dear tiom….A.:ticle 15 that the business of the<\/p>\n
coiiipeia\ufb01   by the Board of Directors subject tn the<\/p>\n
i"'V"provisiene ot"V.A'rt:i\u00a7le;s 18 and 19. Article 18 clearly states that<\/p>\n
" 'Anotxeithstandittg; anything contained in the Articles of Association,<\/p>\n
 i\ufb01evej\ufb01sitnent may free: time te time subject to the provisions of<\/p>\n
it  \ufb02ue\u00bb Aet, issue eueh ctireetivm as it may consider necessary in regard<\/p>\n
it  9'  :70 tiztanee, conduct ef the business of the company or Directers<\/p>\n
H<\/p>\n
thereofand in like manner may vary or amnzi any such _d_irec\u00a3ives<\/p>\n
and the Direciors shall give immediate effect to these' Qfire\u00e9tives<\/p>\n
issued by means of placing in the Board  <\/p>\n
necessary resolutiens at the Board and \u00bb\u00a7n1piei11en1\u00a7\ufb01g4the same-by 9 j <\/p>\n
executive aciion .\n<\/p>\n
11. Learned Ceunsel for  “‘pe.n’t\u00a3onAer”az’gz}Ees that the
\nKarnataka sex Marxaingegg;-aV e\u00a7ee:,:n:{i:eaee(sue) Regaiaiions (ta;
\nshoxji’ previfies peeeedere of conduciiag discipiinary<\/p>\n
 egaimzi  He submits out that the Re-guiations<\/p>\n
do not enipewer \ufb01ge E’oe.’r’ciVte review the order of the disciplinary<\/p>\n
v_1.2fe:’1–:Tf:ie petitioner is admeeely an Officer of the<\/p>\n
eempefiy and ihe Genera} Manager of the Company is the<\/p>\n
V’ . ei\u00a3eifi\u00a7iinazy auihority. It is clear \ufb01em the erder 91′ the discipiinary<\/p>\n
 eutizority that the shew cause notice for conducting the discipiinary<\/p>\n
proeeedizigs was issued on i3,_’?’,2OG\ufb02 aged the artieies 01′ charges<\/p>\n
12<\/span><\/p>\n
was also served on the petitioner on the same day. The 9eti_’_r\u00a7_oi1e:;.i’_~   _;. A’ <\/p>\n
has filed his reply on 10.8.2030 and   1<\/p>\n
Preseming O\ufb01ieer was \ufb01led on 12.12.2oo5.i,_mgug\u00a7>   3<\/p>\n
submitted to the disciplirsary authority   Seeoiio  <\/p>\n
cause notice was issued {:0 the petitioner   re\ufb01ly
\nwas filed by the petitioner on 6;? \u00e9jgpete thai the
\nManagng Director was    ‘impugned
\norder was passed   . Whether
\nthe    authority is. in
\nproportion toV’1’11e–  or” not is a question to be<\/p>\n
oonsidered in fhig ”   \u00abbecause the order of the<\/p>\n
vdi5eip\u00a7:ine1*3i:.a:;\ufb011o1fit3?’His;”rzot__’i;i1r3er ehalienge before me. The only<\/p>\n
ooixgi t\u00a7V>”‘\u00bb'<e,  case is the competence of the State<\/p>\n
  _Goven"ene:it to is\u00e9ue V\u00e9ifection at Annexure 'K' ant} ihe competence<\/p>\n
 _ofthe  the Show cause notice at Annezszure 'L'.<\/p>\n
 Vf13.'The Regulations do not empower the Boar\u00e9 to review<\/p>\n
V    oeder ofthe disoipiinary authez\u00e9ty. As stated above, Article 18<\/p>\n
in<\/p>\n
K<\/p>\n
13<\/span><\/p>\n
of t\ufb01e Articles of Association of the company states  ~<\/p>\n
notwiihstanding anything contained in any of these articIes;”.._’:\u00a7hejV”TVV:  ‘ <\/p>\n
Govemor, may, \ufb01om time to time, subject to \u00a3335 \ufb01fdvisii\u00e9ns of _V  <\/p>\n
Act, issue such Digfectives as he may consider necessary in zfegafd ‘<\/p>\n
to finance, conduct of the business of th\u00e9””c\u00a7”\ufb021pany d;.VDir\u00e9\u00a7:tdi$;’<\/p>\n
tlxereofand in iike manner may     dire\u00e9iive\u00e9.
\nIn exercise of the power under the    State<\/p>\n
Gevemment ha::.’Vi’$ sHiied   the  at Annexure ‘K’.
\nThe expression ‘T’,usine$s   employed in Article 18
\nshoiiid net % given a\u00a7i:z1j;:’a}vI.15:1e\u00e9i1i1V1\u00abg..as con\ufb01ned to activities ofa<\/p>\n
cotiiiiie:;:ia1″‘n a’5.tu;=f”e. wiiiz a pfoiifinoiivation having regard to the<\/p>\n
. facts ziizri  ofiiae case. It is no doubt true that {he main<\/p>\n
 . \u00e9bjex:’t ei’the..\u00a7ornpafi\u00a7r:E’\u00a73TV:te carry on the business of dealers in raw<\/p>\n
‘  siH{,.s\u00a7 ik yam \u00a311 all iis branches and kinds and ‘\u00a30 carry<\/p>\n
V    of marketing, dealers, importer s and exporters sf<\/p>\n
   silk, twisted silk, silk yam, silk waste of an kinds,<\/p>\n
V. ” ~ ..   with siik as one ofits components and silk \ufb01nished precincts<\/p>\n
arid bye-products of all kinds, and description and aim to act: as<\/p>\n
K<\/p>\n
It<\/p>\n
3&3<\/p>\n
ageats for the Seriszsulture Department of the Govemni\u00e9fii’    <\/p>\n
Kamaiaka, other Autht:>rftiesfBoards whetherj:1ccsrparai>cc3.:   u<\/p>\n
The cmnpany has 3350 other ebjects incide\ufb01fgal gr  Vto’tij\u00a7:-L ;, .’<\/p>\n
attainnaent ofmain csbj acts stated abov\u00e9. -. <\/p>\n
14. As stated abexr\u00e9,   is a
\nGovemment company  Va  11%:   efthe
\ncempany passes 31′;  f:Q\u00a3c’iVVa:f”v;}iejudicia\u00a3 1:9 the
\niirserest. Gf\ufb01ff    empower the Boarci
\nie .review  Said  the Articies of Association of<\/p>\n
the corzzpasxy has ._\u00a2:31p0i&’a\u00e9d t}’2\u00a7”‘\u00a7}eveznor to issue such directives<\/p>\n
 he  c\u00e9nsider’:1ec\u00a7$sa;fj in regard to \ufb01nance, cozzduct the<\/p>\n
 i;us\u00a3;1;\u00e9’ss..:>f–.’\u00a7hecQ\u00a7\u00a7:pan\u00a72, etc. As discussed abcwe, {he expression<\/p>\n
‘bu”*siz1V\u00e9\u00a7s% ‘of;’ti\u00ab\u00a7}\u00e9”L:c<jt:r;i;\u00a7%s;z3:' etnpicsyed in Article 18 shouid not be<\/p>\n
 esndersto\u00e9ai  $9 \u00e9zarrew sense to the activity of the commexcial<\/p>\n
 I i1.?:fi'iuA1:'\u20ac:; aignek The word 'business' has a wide iznpcm. The word<\/p>\n
 ___"':bu$'i;;@n\u00a7$' has :19 deiinite teehnicai meaning but is to be teat} with<\/p>\n
 _ '4"';e\u00e9t\u00bbf\u00e9\u00a7;ence t0 the abject and intent cf the \u00e9kct is which it occurs.<\/p>\n
3'.\n<\/p>\n
Us<\/p>\n
15<\/span><\/p>\n
Having regard to the facts and circumstances ofthe case, ‘bixsirfre\u00e9e  . :’  <\/p>\n
ofthe cempany’ employed in Artieie 18 embraces in itseIi’ne{ ienlye ”  <\/p>\n
the commercial transaction ef the compxni\ufb01f “E-1:1: “._aIs\u00bbe’    <\/p>\n
adminisiratien of the company. Thus, if  “I191: ” <\/p>\n
managed properly, the Governor has the  to    S<\/p>\n
‘:6 set right the managemeni (:~f~._t_he Thereiere; ‘(He<\/p>\n
direction issaed by the State    ‘K’ is<\/p>\n
reierabie to Atjti\u00e9ie”  In obedience
\nof the said  V  its present hianagng
\nDirector has siseuedx  \u00a7h3′:!x5.%~.cet;_e-eririetice. Therefore, it eannet be
\nsaid\ufb01iet ofjhe \u00a7\u00a3ate”\u00a33′”7e:ven1rnent in issuing the direction<\/p>\n
to   ‘K’ and the noiice issued by the<\/p>\n
  Tsczard   are without jurisdictieze<\/p>\n
  ‘C_’;I;,ea:nec\u00a5 Ceuzzsei 1231* the petitioner has pieced reliance<\/p>\n
  dee\u00e9siexls e:t’\ufb01\u00a7e Apex Ceurt in HARBHAJAN SINGH 123:<\/p>\n
k’ ‘VKf%;?rM’ SINGH & orr11:1e5 W AIR 1966 so 641, CHIEF or<\/p>\n
  AR;1\ufb02’STAFF & OTHERS 3\/IS. MAJOR Dfiiii\ufb02\/-134′ PAL<\/p>\n
{E
\n_a
\n:12
\n7,5?\n<\/p>\n
‘a<\/p>\n
“x.\n<\/p>\n
17<\/span><\/p>\n
ebjeeimns is the show came notice at Axmexare V’MlLA,V’ ‘and  <\/p>\n
resgon\u00e9ent is directed to consider the same  p:_:1:;~;sA. iwpr\ufb01p\ufb01ai\u00e9  <\/p>\n
erders thereon in accerdance with law. itwi\u00e9; 32\u00a2rehy”u3\u00a71*iiied :%,\u00a7i:i\u20ac’_iZr\\:\u00a2 . <\/p>\n
cmnpeience ofthe State Govemmgnt to iSS\u00a7f3_\u00a7:\u00a7vVE}.\u00a7%_\u20ac\u00a3’i.{i0I1 id
\nas per Axmexure ‘K’ and the pc\ufb01r\u00e9i ‘tie issue shew<\/p>\n
cause notice is the peiit\u00e9on\u00e9rv as pe3;*”:3s.:a.n\u00a7s:s.’1ir:  $1936″ ax\u00e9 decided<\/p>\n
in this writ peiitio:1._.”\u00a372ie;ef\u00a7fr._?; t11i$\u00ab_ei*d_\u00a7\u00e9r sh\u00e9igid ;f\u00a76t”iie understoed
\nas expressing a;1y_.[{>j;\u00a7i;;j:i5n;’\u00ab1-.::+;;    matter one way (yr<\/p>\n
the other. Ne \u00a7g’os;s; <\/p>\n
\n  sd\/%\nJudge\n\n,-J\n\n. w    \" .   'Li: ..\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Niyaz Ahamed Sharieff vs The Principal Secretary on 22 June, 2009 Author: S.Abdul Nazeer xxx: ‘:’1-;;:\u00ab; men comm or’ KARNATAKA ” DATED Tms THE 22″” DAY OF Ji;II%f2cai}9 I” * ‘ BEFORE % Q THEHON’BLE MR.JUs2f1C.’: S.VA.z1\u00a7IjUl;–NA2′.I3ERv… WRIT PETITION Nc}.;356s,2\u00a2i0:: (52:23). V Between: Niyaz, Ahamed sharie\ufb01; .. % M S223 lav: Ibrahirn […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-174256","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nNiyaz Ahamed Sharieff vs The Principal Secretary on 22 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/niyaz-ahamed-sharieff-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-22-june-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Niyaz Ahamed Sharieff vs The Principal Secretary on 22 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/niyaz-ahamed-sharieff-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-22-june-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-06-21T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-05-20T16:26:22+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"12 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/niyaz-ahamed-sharieff-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-22-june-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/niyaz-ahamed-sharieff-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-22-june-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Niyaz Ahamed Sharieff vs The Principal Secretary on 22 June, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-06-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-05-20T16:26:22+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/niyaz-ahamed-sharieff-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-22-june-2009\"},\"wordCount\":2253,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/niyaz-ahamed-sharieff-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-22-june-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/niyaz-ahamed-sharieff-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-22-june-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/niyaz-ahamed-sharieff-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-22-june-2009\",\"name\":\"Niyaz Ahamed Sharieff vs The Principal Secretary on 22 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-06-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-05-20T16:26:22+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/niyaz-ahamed-sharieff-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-22-june-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/niyaz-ahamed-sharieff-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-22-june-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/niyaz-ahamed-sharieff-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-22-june-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Niyaz Ahamed Sharieff vs The Principal Secretary on 22 June, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Niyaz Ahamed Sharieff vs The Principal Secretary on 22 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/niyaz-ahamed-sharieff-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-22-june-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Niyaz Ahamed Sharieff vs The Principal Secretary on 22 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/niyaz-ahamed-sharieff-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-22-june-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-06-21T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-05-20T16:26:22+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"12 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/niyaz-ahamed-sharieff-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-22-june-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/niyaz-ahamed-sharieff-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-22-june-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Niyaz Ahamed Sharieff vs The Principal Secretary on 22 June, 2009","datePublished":"2009-06-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-05-20T16:26:22+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/niyaz-ahamed-sharieff-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-22-june-2009"},"wordCount":2253,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/niyaz-ahamed-sharieff-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-22-june-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/niyaz-ahamed-sharieff-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-22-june-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/niyaz-ahamed-sharieff-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-22-june-2009","name":"Niyaz Ahamed Sharieff vs The Principal Secretary on 22 June, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-06-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-05-20T16:26:22+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/niyaz-ahamed-sharieff-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-22-june-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/niyaz-ahamed-sharieff-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-22-june-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/niyaz-ahamed-sharieff-vs-the-principal-secretary-on-22-june-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Niyaz Ahamed Sharieff vs The Principal Secretary on 22 June, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/174256","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=174256"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/174256\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=174256"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=174256"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=174256"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}