{"id":233633,"date":"2009-10-29T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-10-28T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-ramakrishna-pai-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2009"},"modified":"2019-04-12T11:03:37","modified_gmt":"2019-04-12T05:33:37","slug":"b-ramakrishna-pai-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-ramakrishna-pai-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2009","title":{"rendered":"B Ramakrishna Pai vs The State Of Karnataka on 29 October, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
B Ramakrishna Pai vs The State Of Karnataka on 29 October, 2009<\/div>\n
Author: H N Das<\/div>\n
 _ BAN\u20aci{AI,OREw54Q -  O 11111 H _\n\nIN THE HEGH COURT OF KOAORQNATA KA AT BANGALOORE\n\n\"DATED THIS THE 29\"] DAY OF OCTOBER~;~~2QG:9__':OOI'  \n\nBEFORE \n\nTHE }-\u20ac[ON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H1'--J'. NAGVAB\/IQ\u00a7{}5}I\\:I:V \n\nW.P.No.28719\/2009 23951O\/2oQ9<LB\/E:.\u00a7)kkk \n\nW.P.No.28719[2009\n\nBETVVEEN:\n\nB.RAMAK'R1311;$sAPA1;"' ' 4'\nS\/0 IATE }3.;~1--z\\.sI<-grx p,\u00ab..1_?OA  \" 'V\nAGED 42?YEARS -- V f_    \nR\/A NO.80\/\"s,_1'E'\"? MAIN \u00bb  _.\nA.K.COLON\"Y; 'M_A'I'HI--KE}?.E \n\n..PETITION.ER\n\n ~(By.;s\u00a7:i;;AmKU:x1,\u00e9;~R s.PAT1L, sR.c_:0U.NsIz[, I%'OR\n\npRA'5A1) 8;: E3-A\u00a7\\E\u00a73}IYA ASSOCI.A'1\"i}IS, ADVS)\n\n',__AN':>:'\n\n  '1  'I'}E}i STATE OF .KARNATAK\/\\\n_  I'31;a1>A:R'1'MEN'1* OF URBAN I)E'V[\u20acII_.()PM'}%IN'I'\n  VIELDHANA SOULDHA, BANGALORE\n \" \"'R.EPRI':1SEN'I'ED BY UNDER SECIR.E'I'ARY\n\" TO GOV'[?.RNMfiN'I'.\n\nauvk\n\n\n\n\"X\n\n3\n\n2. Bf-i{'RUEtIA\"I' BANGALORE MiA'E-{IXNACSAVRA P}-\\l,IK}_\u20ac\nN. R.SQUA.RE, BANGALORE.\nREI\"RES1i.N'I'I%li) BY ITS CO.MM1SS.IONE R\n\n3. 1>.R.RAMEs:r-1\nAGIZD ABOUT 49 YEARS\n\ns;O IO,A.'I'E PRU DRAMURTHY\n\nFORMER MAYOR, BMP,\n\nN0. 144, .PAfRVA'I'H}PU1RAM.\n\nhALBAG}.I'.f~'O]-T?.T ROAD,  -T    \nBANGALORESOOOO4. V,   ,RL:SF.C?lfi?m;ms'*~\n\n(By SR1 K.M.NA'\u00a3'_ARA], AD:>14.A::v\";<;f:;\\1Ja:RAL" .__ \nWm-1 sM'1'.1v:.c.NOAGAsHR}3:\u00ab:, 1;-.1:i:fc3IP_1:OR R1 "\nSR! K.N.PUT'I'EGOW1}A"A\/'1'i'\u00a7if  ._  _\nSR] G..NAGARA]ALU NAHJU, :52   "\n\nSR1" P.R.RAMESH FOR   V\n\n'}fhis VWrifVj\u00bbVpeti*\u00a7i'O:1.f}.iefi under Articles 226 81 227 of the\nConstitution 'of In'.itia.._"tO "quash the Government Order\ndated 21.012009 'V..in'~\u00ab..A'E~TQ;F~3AE" MLR 2003 (Part), Bangalore\npublished i:'1~..theV Kariaata\u00e9ia Gazette dated 21.07.2009 Vida\nAnr;e.\u00a7Ja:VVxi;N ..  \n\ns\/O -:.,A11';r:.1.A.s<::_HO<;)L\n- O C4-"F' CROSS, 1<_AMMA<.;ONDAHA_I,.JO,:\n" , j'.'\u00a7!\u00a7,V[,J'_l\u00a3r'l}.'fIAl:AIJ} W'ES'I',\n\n  BA;.NGAl4.OR'\u00a5Ii\u00abS6O 015.\n\n.. PET1.'I'1ONER\n\n" ' = (By sri.MANMOH AN.1.'.N.ADV)\n\nr%v"'U\n\n\n\n14.}\n\n_P_x.N.._D:\n\n1, THE STATE OF KARNATAKA\n\nDEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT\nVEDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE J  T .\nREPRESENTED BY ITS UNDER SECRETARY" \u00ab ._ \nTO GOVERNMENT.  S A \n\n2. BHRUHAT BANGALORE MAB:AN.AGARAPA1ERE  \n\nNRSQUARE, BANGALORE,  _   *\n\nREPRESENTED BY ITS GOMMISSTOBJER.  '  \n  7 - " "~.__m_'",..RESPONDENTS\n\n(By SR1 K.M.NATA..RA1, ADD}..ADV.GE\u00bbNERAL  '- \nWETH SM'\u00a7.}ui'.C,NfAG.\/SESHREE, H.C'GB;~ROR"R1\nSR1 K.N.RLWTEC\u00a7QWDA WITH ._ .-- 1; , i \nSRI G.NAGA;RA]ALtI NA113U,' EQR E,2',~--\n\n?i'his   Articles 226 8: 227 of the\nConstitution of _ Iiidia praying__ to stay all further proceedings\n\npursuant to the '\u20ac~}oirernIi'1e_ntJ noti\ufb01cation dated 21.07.2009 in\nNo.NA_.E 139\u00b0 2008'--.(Pa;*t), Bangalore (Produced as Annexur-e-\n\n  Th\u20acse\u00abpe'titions coming on for preliminary hearing B group\n\nA   day. cottrt made the following;\n\nORDER\n<\/pre>\n
 In these writ petitions the petitioners have called in<\/p>\n
  .. _..lquestio11 the Government order dated 21.07.2009 bearing No.<\/p>\n
NAE 139 MLR 2008 (Part), Bangalore published in the Kamataka<\/p>\n
a”‘”””‘<\/p>\n
Gazette as found at Annexure-\u00abA specifying the number of seats<\/p>\n
reserved for Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribes  _<\/p>\n
categories and further specifying th.e\u00bb–~g1_1ideli’nelsdl’tof1oca,te.p of Si’<\/p>\n
Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe  sea’t”:–:..ApA. *     A<\/p>\n
2. Prior to 2O(3{2r_the  respondent’–wasl called as
\nthe Bangalore Mahanagaral fthe BMP). The<\/p>\n
second respondent’ip:jIiii\\{E13.lhadiaii   of councellors and
\ntheir terry -. ‘yon  “lThe \ufb01rst respondent —-
\nGovernrnent. hy  area to the second respondent<\/p>\n
named –.it as lilruhatiliangalore Mahanagara Palike (for short: ‘the<\/p>\n
  respondents failed to conduct the elections and<\/p>\n
l:constitLitela.._ne\u00a7afl.body of councellors, a writ petition was filed<\/p>\n
 before.  in W.P. No. 154820006 for a direction tot he<\/p>\n
” respondents to conduct elections. This writ petition came to be<\/p>\n
  disposed on 02.07.2007 with a direction to the respondents to<\/p>\n
conduct elections within a time frame of three months. The<\/p>\n
“-..\n<\/p>\n
(N<\/p>\n
respondents failed to comply the directions issued by thisilorirt<\/p>\n
in W.P. No. 15482\/2006. This failure on the     _
\nrespondents in holding elections to the__sec..ond  ll ”
\nwas brought to the notice of this Court}.A:’l)_iiirision   pp<\/p>\n
court vide order dated  fiirtherr,   the ii i<\/p>\n
respondents as under:\n<\/p>\n
(1)<\/span><\/p>\n
the “State (3overn\u00abment~.i”_shallVissue corrigendum<\/p>\n
 as–…reqt1ir’ed\u00abl_’irr_ para~3 of the affidavit
\nav  filed-.b*,’l the Government, within<\/p>\n
* seven da.\u00a7:;ls,\u00bb,i,e;,.,oi:– or before 23*” September 2009 and<\/p>\n
*_’theVreaft_er,,l tollllpublish the reservation noti\ufb01cation<\/p>\n
within two weeks, i.e. on or before 9″‘ October,<\/p>\n
 ‘3 .\n<\/p>\n
1- ._ J<\/p>\n
[the State Government shall release entire balance<\/p>\n
ll ‘funds to the State Election Commission in two equal<\/p>\n
installments i.e. the first installment shall be made
\non or before 71* October, 2009 and the second shall
\nbe made by 15″‘ October, 2009 for the conduct of
\nBMP election;\n<\/p>\n
w.uN<\/p>\n
6<\/span><\/p>\n
(iii) the Election Commissioner is directed to__ann0i1nc’eV<\/p>\n
the events of the election on or before’-23″‘.  M<\/p>\n
2009; and   –\n<\/p>\n
(iv) the above directions _shalli”t3:<&*._ isrrictly.~aig1hered <\/p>\n
all the respondents    of time
\nshall be granted on _ V,<\/p>\n
3. In co?:r11v3iian:cf-e–   by this Court
\nas stated      the impugned
\nnoti\ufb01cation ii~iA1inexi1re A specifying the seats
\nreserVedKfor’  ficheduled Tribes, backward class<\/p>\n
and other categories. iand\ufb01isoiiiguideiine to locate Scheduled Castes<\/p>\n
 and”Scheduleei&TribesHseats in different wards. Hence these writ<\/p>\n
iipetitioris; T ._ V ‘ V <\/p>\n
 \u00e9i\ufb02eard arguments on both the side and perused the entire<\/p>\n
” \u00ab  V’ writ’ “papers.\n<\/p>\n
;\u00bb_J’\\<\/p>\n
<7"\n<\/p>\n
V S  S’   llsacigyvayd. \u00e9iagses — (B) (Women) 4<\/p>\n
5. In the larger area under the BBMP 198  K<\/p>\n
on the basis of population. Under the impugned, v_Arji~oti1″-kfatioizii ‘–”  <\/p>\n
Annexure A number of seats reserved for S-::jh\u00e9duI_ed,<\/p>\n
Scheduled Tribes and other categories 611 the ba5is’l’t}f:censt1s bf <\/p>\n
the year 2001 are noti\ufb01ed and the  isas  <\/p>\n
CATEGORY    gbi\u00e9. o.1?’sIa:iAl’I’s .lRl?1SERV]E.D<\/p>\n
Scheduled Caste      ‘   \u00b0 W
\nV . . ‘ . .. Ix ‘
\nScheduled Caste (xxtemen) V ‘  _\u00bb  8 ”\n<\/p>\n
Scheduled Tribe S   ” _  _    4′ S<\/p>\n
Scht\u00e9dliied.T:it?Sll{V’C9ii19\u00a51) S ”   sssss ‘A S 1<\/p>\n
Backward Classes l&fV(p\u00e9:–\u00a7\u00a7:i5) 35<\/p>\n
liacliward Classes —  18 3’<\/p>\n
Classes ~:\u00a7(Persons) 9<\/p>\n
E.\n<\/p>\n
  l\u20acieneraii.V l 71<\/p>\n
9<\/span><\/p>\n
7. A reading of Article 243 (T) of the Constitution and
\nSection 7 of the KMC Act speci\ufb01es reservation of seats to the<\/p>\n
Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and women by rota’tio’nip’to’<\/p>\n
different constituencies in a municipality. In these p7riovisio.ns it  i<\/p>\n
not speci\ufb01ed as to how and’ in what manner ‘the”.seats– s_o’-resvervedl<\/p>\n
are to be located in differentgplaces “of the municipalitjf or <\/p>\n
corporation. Therefore it cannot She said thatpithe guidelines
\nspeci\ufb01ed in the impugnedto”locate.,the reserved seats<\/p>\n
for Scheduled Caste’ and  in BBMP area<\/p>\n
is opposed the Constitution and Section 7 of<\/p>\n
the K}\/[C Act: Hence Ildeciine to accept the contention of the<\/p>\n
l’learinedE’cic5i1nsel for  petitioners that clauses 5 and 6 in the<\/p>\n
lliimp\u00e9iignedil”notification are contrary to Articie 243 (T) of the<\/p>\n
-V con\u00a7ti:uti\u00a7n’ and Section 7 of the KMC Act.<\/p>\n
 During the course of argument, a direction was<\/p>\n
 V. issued to the Government to clarify clauses 5 and 6 of the<\/p>\n
(‘7L\\\\\/”‘2i”‘~
\n.3!<\/p>\n
1 {l<\/p>\n
impugned noti\ufb01cation and also to place on record, the statistics<\/p>\n
relating to the total population in each ward, the percentage of<\/p>\n
Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe population.  <\/p>\n
the Government \ufb01led an affidavit clarifying clauses,  i;he5  C ‘<\/p>\n
impugned noti\ufb01cation and also placed:=.necessaiy’\ufb01at-iStics.”1?ron1:;aAl<\/p>\n
combined reading of clauses 5 a’I5id”6._of theimpugnednoti\ufb01cation 2 S’<\/p>\n
and the clari\ufb01cation placed by Vth-ei:A.Coife.rnment;~the.~:l”ollowing<\/p>\n
guidelines are speci\ufb01ed to locate teserivedysealts for Scheduled<\/p>\n
Castes and’\ufb01cheduleti\ufb02lribegcategories in different wards in BBMP<\/p>\n
area.\n<\/p>\n
a. No”~wardVwi_th’ini  BBMP area is spread across in more
\nthan oneiiassembly constituency and the entire ward is<\/p>\n
V ‘  ‘locatedin one of the assembly constituencies within the<\/p>\n
 area.\n<\/p>\n
 assembly constituency is taken as the basis for
\nlocating one reserved Scheduled Caste category seat in<\/p>\n
each of the assembly constituencies.<\/p>\n
aw<\/p>\n
i l<\/p>\n
c. 23 seats reserved for Scheduled caste category are to be<\/p>\n
located from out of 28 assembly constituencies.<\/p>\n
Therefore the assembly constituencies  _<\/p>\n
Scheduled Caste population; is ,t_akeIf.'”as”  S”<\/p>\n
locate the reserved seats llibr 7..ASChedt1levd.. <\/p>\n
ascending order.\n<\/p>\n
d. The ward \\nrit?1fi12..\u00ab_ having
\nhighest Scheduled  be reserved for<\/p>\n
   V  ‘ <\/p>\n
_ 9., By folloyving the above guidelines the reserved seats for<\/p>\n
S   Caste and Scheduled Tribe categories will be located in<\/p>\n
125 ‘wards  asseinbly constituencies. The above guidelines to<\/p>\n
–V locate ‘Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe categories in the<\/p>\n
V’  area is reasonable, rational, practical and will achieve the<\/p>\n
  Dllrpose of social iustice. The guidelines issued by the respondents<\/p>\n
0″”\n<\/p>\n
.~ , notiiieation.\n<\/p>\n
cannot be said arbitrary, illegal or irrational. ‘I’11erefore.t1ie.<_'i7u'rit<\/p>\n
petitions are liable to be rejected.\n<\/p>\n
10. The Supreme Court in thepppcase of_.’R.’C.– ll ”<\/p>\n
Union of India (1994 Supp. (1) sec 32%;}. held ‘tl1at”‘tliere <\/p>\n
be uniformity of population or electoral strlengt}:1..inv_.tlieV \ufb01a\ufb01er of V<\/p>\n
delimitation of constittlen_eie3;~””‘ “‘\u00a7’l1eref.ore, tlie'”gL1ide1i.nes
\nspeci\ufb01ed in the imptignedv”notiiEeatio=i1~.,va1’e’ 1\u00bb de\ufb01nite, speci\ufb01c,<\/p>\n
practical and re_aso:e’able.V 4″.E3.zen ltherelaI’e” little variations the<\/p>\n
same will not in%.v;;li.date the”-irnpugned noti\ufb01cation. Therefore, I
\nfind no justifiable’ to interfere with the impugned<\/p>\n
‘  V 11..Forl3–t1ie reasons stated above, the following;<\/p>\n
ORDER<\/p>\n
* .  Writ petitions are hereby dismissed.<\/p>\n
oR\\:v-\n<\/p>\n
13<\/span><\/p>\n
It is made clear that the respondents shall take steps
\nforthwith to comply the directions issued by this
\nCourt in its order dated 17.09.2009 in<\/p>\n
W.?.15A’-182\/2006. Ordered accordingly.   ~<\/p>\n
Ssi\/~sis'[is    o<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court B Ramakrishna Pai vs The State Of Karnataka on 29 October, 2009 Author: H N Das _ BAN\u20aci{AI,OREw54Q – O 11111 H _ IN THE HEGH COURT OF KOAORQNATA KA AT BANGALOORE “DATED THIS THE 29”] DAY OF OCTOBER~;~~2QG:9__’:OOI’ BEFORE THE }-\u20ac[ON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H1′–J’. NAGVAB\/IQ\u00a7{}5}I\\:I:V W.P.No.28719\/2009 23951O\/2oQ9<LB\/E:.\u00a7)kkk W.P.No.28719[2009 BETVVEEN: B.RAMAK'R1311;$sAPA1;"' ' […]<\/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-233633","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nB Ramakrishna Pai vs The State Of Karnataka on 29 October, 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\/b-ramakrishna-pai-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"B Ramakrishna Pai vs The State Of Karnataka on 29 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-ramakrishna-pai-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-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=\"2009-10-28T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-04-12T05:33:37+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=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-ramakrishna-pai-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-ramakrishna-pai-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"B Ramakrishna Pai vs The State Of Karnataka on 29 October, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-04-12T05:33:37+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-ramakrishna-pai-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1162,\"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\/b-ramakrishna-pai-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-ramakrishna-pai-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-ramakrishna-pai-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2009\",\"name\":\"B Ramakrishna Pai vs The State Of Karnataka on 29 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-04-12T05:33:37+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-ramakrishna-pai-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-ramakrishna-pai-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-ramakrishna-pai-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"B Ramakrishna Pai vs The State Of Karnataka on 29 October, 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"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":"B Ramakrishna Pai vs The State Of Karnataka on 29 October, 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\/b-ramakrishna-pai-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"B Ramakrishna Pai vs The State Of Karnataka on 29 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-ramakrishna-pai-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-10-28T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-04-12T05:33:37+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":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-ramakrishna-pai-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-ramakrishna-pai-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"B Ramakrishna Pai vs The State Of Karnataka on 29 October, 2009","datePublished":"2009-10-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-04-12T05:33:37+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-ramakrishna-pai-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2009"},"wordCount":1162,"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\/b-ramakrishna-pai-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-ramakrishna-pai-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-ramakrishna-pai-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2009","name":"B Ramakrishna Pai vs The State Of Karnataka on 29 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-10-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-04-12T05:33:37+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-ramakrishna-pai-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-ramakrishna-pai-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/b-ramakrishna-pai-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"B Ramakrishna Pai vs The State Of Karnataka on 29 October, 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","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\/233633","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=233633"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/233633\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=233633"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=233633"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=233633"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}