{"id":52051,"date":"2010-09-07T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-09-06T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-d-hucchanarasiah-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-7-september-2010"},"modified":"2019-03-04T21:25:47","modified_gmt":"2019-03-04T15:55:47","slug":"sri-d-hucchanarasiah-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-7-september-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-d-hucchanarasiah-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-7-september-2010","title":{"rendered":"Sri D Hucchanarasiah vs State Of Karnataka on 7 September, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Sri D Hucchanarasiah vs State Of Karnataka on 7 September, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: V.G.Sabhahit And K.Govindarajulu<\/div>\n
 \" 'AND-If' E \n\nIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE\nDATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER \n\nPRESENT\n\nTHE HONELE MR JUSTICEII O    \n\nAND\nTHE HONBLE MR JUSTIOCEV K GOxIII*\u00bbIDARA.;I.1_IL.I_I \n\nWRIT PETITION  QF 2003  \n\nBETWEEN:\nSR1 D.HUccHANAILASIAI-1,'    :\nS\/0 LATE DASAP\u00a3;IA,V .   _  \" \nAGE: 57   '     \nWORKING A\u20acs_AC_C'='OUN'1'Si S.I'_IR.ER1N1?ENDENT,\nOEEICEOE.EXEcU'I?IvE\u00bb--EI\\I(3INEER,\"'\nZILLA P:,ANcH'YA;T ENCHNEERINO DIVISION,\nMYSO%, = ' I *  I    ...PETITIONER\n(BY SRI RIANc;.ANATI.IA;S\"J.O'iS,\n\nSR1 MMRAMESH IIOIS;-ADvs.)\n\nV'    OE 'KARNATAIIA,\n\nRER'I'I_3\u00ab. 13'1\"'i?I_NANCE COMMISSIONER,\nvIDH_ANA,SOL-IDHA,\n\nV V . BANGALORE.\"\n\n    SECRETARY, PWD\n \"S;OVT;\"~_OE KARNATAKA,\n _-M';S.BUILDING.\n ... BA1\u00e9IGALORE.\n\n\n\n3. THE CHIEF ENGINEER,\n{COMMUNICATION AND BUILDING}\nSOUTH, K.R.CIRCLE,\n\nBANGALORE.\n\n4. THE CONTROLLER OF STATE ACCOUNTS, I 2\n\nSTATE ACCOUNTS DEPT.\nVI FLOOR, CAVERI BHAVAN,\nBANGALORE ---- 560001.\n\n5. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEFfR',\u00ab--.._ .,\nZILLA PANCHYAT ENGINEERING?'  '\nMYSORE.  .\n\n6. SR} D.B.BIRADAR,  ; \nS \/O BHEEMARAYA BIRADAR,   \nAGE:ABOUT45 YEARS,   \nACCOUNTS sUP1LjRINTE;NDENfr,   \nZILLA PANCHYEATDEVISIQN, \" \nBIJAPUR. \"       '\n\n7. SR1  \nAGE:4E}   ,  --\nACCOUzsITs. SUPERINTENDOENT', '\nNATIONAL HJGHWA'{_:DIVN.I;\"'\u00ab \nCHITRADUFIGA, \" \" \n\n8. SR; ASHOK  \n\n \" \" \u00abAGE-:.C._A'BQU'1\"\u00bb 45 \n ACC.OU.1\\_?TS SUPERINTENDENT.\nFPUIBLIC WO'\u00a32Ks_1:.EpT.,\n\nBIJAPURL'  - V\n\n9. SR1 R.V.'J-A7RTAR1<AR,\n\n _ ,AGE:53~.YEARS,\n' \u00bb .  -- -. AC.COUN'FS SUPERINTENDENT,\n I \u00bbMINOR.IRRIGATION DIVISION,\n" CLBANCALORE.\n\nI '] 1.o..E3RI J.GOPAL,\n\n\n\n S V' 'IS\/0'-v'RUDIzA1AH.\n\nAGE: 49 YEARS.\n\nACCOUNTS SUPERINTENDENT,\nMINOR IRRIGATION DIV N.,\nBELLARY.\n\n11.SRI CHANDRASHEKAR HANNIKERI,\nAGE: 58 YEARS,  _\nACCOUNTS SUPERINTENDENT, " "\nOFFICE OF' EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, 1\nPUBLIC WORKS DEPT, I  '\nBELAGUM DIVISION, BELAGUM~..._V\n\n12.SRI M.P.JAYARAM,\n\nAGE: ABOUT 51  \n\nS\/0 PADMANABAHAIAI-L_   .\nACCOUNTS SUPERINTENDENT,--.     \nOFFICE OF THE ExECU'mIE'--ENG1NEER,  = '\n\nPUBLIC WORKS.DEPT.,\u00a7BLDC\u00a7;  ' \nNAZARABAD,f\u00a7(IY:5;13RI3,V =  ' \n\n13.SRI VENKATAEAJU.'   ..  '\nS\/0    \nAGE: AI30UTI48'I\u00a5EA?RS,--.'I  I %\nACCoUNTS-- SUPERINTE NDENT,\nPUBLIC WORKS     \nMYSORE   \n\n14.SI2.i[ I\u00a7.KAI\\\/IAI';A1<AR, _\n\n' ._ AG1'1:_4Q,YEARS\u00ab,I _\n"ACCO'UN'fS SUEERINTENDENT,\n\nPU_BI-..IVC WrQRKS:j I)EPT.,\nMAPJQALQRIFQ, '\n\n-\u00ab . ,.  ' 15.SRI PARASHURAM\n\n2  AGE: ABOUT 45 YEARS.\n\n "ACCOUNTS SUPERINTENDENT,\n\n_ ;0I?'.FICE OF EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,\n\n  "VARAHI DIVN., SIDDAPURA.\n\n.. UDUPI DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENTS<\/pre>\n
[BY SR1 R.SWAMYNA’I’HAN. ADV. FOR R1,
\nSMT SHEELA KRISHNA, ADV. F OR R1 -5,
\nSR} IVLVINAY KEERTHY, ADV. F OR R6- 15}<\/p>\n
THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER   _
\n227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYI.N’GV-‘i’Q”-<\/p>\n
ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED..,.”‘i8.i.2.2oo2′ —.
\nPASSED BY THE TIRBUNATL\u00bb ._iN  AP_PI.JiiCATION’-.A<\/p>\n
NO.5201 \/2002 VIDE ANNEXURE-C1,’<\/p>\n
THIS PETITION COMING oN”r.oR FINA}-_\u00bb <\/p>\n
THIS DAY, SABHAHIT J., MADEjn~IE EoI,I,o\\2I{Ii\u00abI:(}3′.._f  ”
\nThis petition is filed’ Application
\nNo.5201\/2001 oiieiiie riie \ufb01rijihe’  ‘Administrative<\/p>\n
Tribunal at  (Fj1ereinafterf referred to as “KAT” for<\/p>\n
brevity} the order dated 18.12.2002
\nwherein the tribunal Aihas\u00e9dehclified to quash the Government<\/p>\n
Orderpdated  as  Annexure A and dismissed the<\/p>\n
 2 “applicatio11 with costsfiii<\/p>\n
2 ‘   herein \ufb01led Application No.5201\/2001 on<\/p>\n
  the file of the KAT averring that the applicant belongs to the<\/p>\n
  “cadre””of Accounts Superinendent in the scale of Rs.5575–<\/p>\n
  which is an en~cadered post in the State Accounts<\/p>\n
‘ I-3 \/9<\/p>\n
‘if<\/p>\n
Department. Even though the post is shown in the cadre<\/p>\n
strength of Public Works Department, as per the decision’~of<\/p>\n
the Horl’ble Supreme Court of India in the case  of .<\/p>\n
Mysore vs M N Krishnamurthy andApVothers.”””‘1’llie,  9″‘<\/p>\n
Accounts Superintendent have been eneaderedl irlthe ::Sta’t-3*<\/p>\n
Accounts Department and the -entire’Acontrol:’being”vested <\/p>\n
with the Controller of State  land the vV}Finance
\nDepartment, to comply  the o:rder.__p.assed by  Hon’b1e
\nSupreme Court in that regard.  and recruitment
\n9′ A C’   \\}’\\”‘u\u00ab.1x:”{Ae,.\n<\/p>\n
rules of Public “WorkstDep-artrnent.’vpf\u00e9i\ufb02 that post of
\nAccounts Sliipelfinteridenlt-[has9..to exclusively filled by
\ndeputatslon l_of7I'[_ana  of _* the cadre of Accounts
\nSuperinte’ndent of ..thejy’Sta’t.-{Accounts Department. The said<\/p>\n
rules have been ‘either amended or altered in any<\/p>\n
 9’ ”l1<1an'i:'.–e:r and hold the\ufb02field and the same cannot be altered by<\/p>\n
 notwithstanding the said settled legal<\/p>\n
position, 2*.15"i}eslpondent has by an order dated 26.7.1999 —<\/p>\n
999"'-.\u00ab.!'Annexure_AT~A5 sought to fill up the post of Accounts<\/p>\n
  "S'uperi13tendent from FDAs of Public Works Department on<\/p>\n
 …Wpromotion which is not permissible and by a Government<\/p>\n
Order dated 2.6.2000 the decision has been taken after due<\/p>\n
consuitation between the Public Works Department.<\/p>\n
Finance Department that posts stated t}'l(3I'\u20ac\u00a7iI1""'u;\u00a7\/'ii: ~<\/p>\n
graded with effect from 2.6.20_O,Q,__ Vfhen'.::'_'the"  "<\/p>\n
Government Order was in force and-._the_p"mies'have"not.:"t2e\u00e9n_1<\/p>\n
amended, one Sn' Venkat'ara;'u \ufb02ied pan7_ apvpIica;'tion –. L'<\/p>\n
No.I112\/2001 challenging theiiposting'dofiappiicant to
\nMysore, in the present  "da\u00a7\u20ac'd.g5,1.200l as per
\nAnnexure A7. The saidporder [becorne effective
\nand applicant  and it is further
\naverred that V.  iistoovtd 'thus, 2nd respondent
\n  eontrary to recruitment
\nrules hasA'passed'the.\u00bb 18.4.2001 vide AnneX:ureA8<\/p>\n
wherein, ford' "irr1p1en1entation of the earlier order dated<\/p>\n
 among 'V253"Accounts Superintendent posts, 13<\/p>\n
V'"Aiccoii11ts'Siip\u00e9eriintendent Posts has been downgraded and it<\/p>\n
is  .tha.ti::the said posts should be \ufb01iled up by the<\/p>\n
'Public Woijks Department on promotion from the cadre of<\/p>\n
    Wherefore, the petitioner sought for quashing of the<\/p>\n
 ___"'.'order dated 18.4.2001 Vide Annexure A8 and to quash the<\/p>\n
{\u00a39\/\u00a7:2<\/p>\n
"-':\\1\\w3" '17. N; '~:\u00bb~…\\ v\\ <\/p>\n
C; ~=- ._ _ ..\n<\/p>\n
orderkthat it h\u00e9\u00e9\u00e9\u00e9beenzarbitrary and Violative of Article 14<\/p>\n
g’ is ~\/\\ *1\u00bb.  3 at ‘mf-w. 03.. :’S.\u00bb\\\u00a7\u00a7r.\\r  ,<\/p>\n
and 16:KIssue consequential directions to the respondent.s”to<\/p>\n
continue the applicant in the post without  ~<\/p>\n
View of his valid appointment in  said post” the if<\/p>\n
Cadre and Recruitment Rules  paissi’ <\/p>\n
further orders as this Court may’ c.1_eemlfit. if V<\/p>\n
3. The applicationx’Was’l_\ufb01 the respondents
\ncontending that the  been upheld
\nand the applic-\u00e9_{:ntlnot   affected by the
\ndown grading    The would only be
\nconsequ.entia_lly:faffeclted   be either reverted back
\nto the   posted to some other place.\n<\/p>\n
In any ..viewlu”of_:Vtl1e” In’-atter, he had no locus standi to<\/p>\n
 V’ ‘c-halien’ge.”the’* said oi~dc\u00a3_’f<\/p>\n
l ‘   iivas no order of stay before the tribunal. The<\/p>\n
  tribunal’ after hearing the contentions of the parties, rejected<\/p>\n
  “the.:ap’plication by its order dated 18.12.2002 and feeling<\/p>\n
 by the same, this writ petition is filed by the<\/p>\n
applicant in Application No.5201\/2001 on the file of the<\/p>\n
KAT.\n<\/p>\n
5. We have heard the learne_d”Mcouns_eI”appearing.for_ K”<\/p>\n
the petitioner, learned counsel appearing for ‘iorespo’17,dent.s’6i_’<\/p>\n
to 15 and the learned Government Aid-votcaate  for <\/p>\n
respondents 1 to 4.\n<\/p>\n
6. Learned coun.se1_  ‘the petitioner
\nsubmitted   orderi  the post of 13
\nAccounts   to recruit to the said
\nposts  working in the PWI)
\nDepartment_ and ;Errigatbi:on_:’:pDepartment from the cadre of<\/p>\n
FDAs would \u00e9tpiejvudiclaily aifect the petitioner as he will be<\/p>\n
 “d.ispIaced_”rfro’m& the  \u00abpost as he is working on deputation<\/p>\n
 \u00e9vpetitioner is downgraded, the person promoted<\/p>\n
wou1d’Vhbeva.pp’:o\u00a3nted to his post and therefore, he would be<\/p>\n
vd’,.,_”prejud1ciaI]:y affected by the order and the notification of<\/p>\n
 ._ “d’own\u00a7i7ading. Learned counsel submitted that the order of<\/p>\n
 ..__”””doi;\u00a2;rngrad1ng of 13 posts of Accounts Superintendents has<\/p>\n
been set–aside by the Division Bench of this Court in M V
\nDIXIT 8: ORS vs STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS reported in
\nHR 2004 Kar., 3802 and in paragraph 27 of the-.__said
\nJudgment as under: if 0
\n“Therefore, it has to be helcgl 00′.\n<\/p>\n
notifications dated 18.6.1999 and 5,.],_2.’=199.9: ._<\/p>\n
downgrading certain postsii \u00bb..of I accounts
\nSuperintendents to a lower} scale are “inva1’idv,_p<\/p>\n
being contrary to Section 3(1) a–r_1d’J3[3}. _0f..ti’ie ~<\/p>\n
Karnataka State Civil: _Services’~ Act,-‘–l.1978.
\nHowever, as we are infoirried that the decisionof.
\na learned Single Judge o’f\u00bb._this Court ‘by’ order
\ndated 7.7.2000 _ in W..P._N.os;v29965i66\/1999
\nupholding the validity of the notification dated
\n18.6.1999, has attained fin;1lity,”l.this_ decision
\nWill not’ affect the V  posts “v.\\jvhi_’ch were
\ndowngraded and ,\ufb011led.:”by” Apromoteesl from the
\ncadre of\u00a7FirlstVg.’Divi:sion -.Assist’ants\/Sftore Keepers
\nin the _PW\/ Irrigativori ‘C’liC’–.pEI.IT.’l2Ii”l:fi’.’I1t”.’<\/p>\n
has held ‘that even ttiotrglripetitioner has retired from service<\/p>\n
on attaining tlieaage’ ofsuperannuation on 30.4.2008, there<\/p>\n
. A”VV&5Sli”?50l’rlS5t53’\u00ab..befof\u00e9wthis Court or before the tribunal.<\/p>\n
 itherelfo’re:,’  be entitled to consequential benefits.<\/p>\n
   Government Advocate submitted that the<\/p>\n
‘gdownlgrtaldingx of the post would not in anyway affect the<\/p>\n
‘ .jconlditions of service of applicant as he has been on<\/p>\n
K5353<\/p>\n
10<\/span><\/p>\n
deputation and he cannot claim right to continue in the
\nsame post as his deputation is subject to repatriation and
\nposting to another department and continuing in the<\/p>\n
Accounts Department and in any View of the matter’,-j\u00e9\u00e9sincye<\/p>\n
the petitioner has attained the age of superannuatoioii <\/p>\n
retired from service on 30.6.200-53;’ the p:rayer’l:.itseif_i’has<\/p>\n
become infructuous as petitioner <\/p>\n
any consequential benefits.\n<\/p>\n
8. Learned counsel appearing for responcl.envt\u00a7s 6 to 14<\/p>\n
submitted that petitioner  consequential<\/p>\n
bene\ufb01t event ‘iffjt.h_e ‘A?wr1t_petition is allowed as he is already
\nbeen re’i:ire’d from .jserv:\u00a2e;.  Therefore, petitioner is not<\/p>\n
entitied to lany relief “inl'”this writ petition and sought for<\/p>\n
it it   the  petition.\n<\/p>\n
  9.,  izsze have given careful consideration to the<\/p>\n
llcopntentioris..of;:.the learned counsel appearing for the parties<\/p>\n
and4″scrt1.tin’1sed the material on record.<\/p>\n
1:5,”-\u00e9<\/p>\n
V3<\/p>\n
10. The material on record would clearly Show that<\/p>\n
the petitioner\/applicant before the tribunal was worl:ing=–on<\/p>\n
deputation in the post of Accounts ‘ _<\/p>\n
according to him, he was affected bynthe d\u00a2;sm1g\u00a3e;dirig’er  K”<\/p>\n
posts by the Government by notii”icatiQ’ne  1<\/p>\n
he would be repatriated Acvcounts–.l:’<\/p>\n
Department or posted to   and his
\nservices in the PWI)  be  The validity or
\notherwise of the n_otificati.o.n_  would not
\nin any way   ioflseivice of the applicant
\nand even  allowed, the same would not
\nenableaghiitri  benefit as there is
\nno reduc+.io’nlin  condition of service and the<\/p>\n
tribunal has rightly  that the application was on<\/p>\n
 ,,,.,deputatio.n,”i*he cannotvclaim as of right to continue in the<\/p>\n
 u._sa;ne’  ~ lvlrzithat view of the matter, since the petitioner<\/p>\n
 frornbyeing shifted from the post in which he was on<\/p>\n
Qdeputatioii in the FWD as Accounts Superintendent, is not<\/p>\n
‘ll: way affected by the downgrading of the post and there<\/p>\n
  was no order of stay before the tribunal or in this writ<\/p>\n
in<\/p>\n
 brn\ufb01la ‘V <\/p>\n
petition. It is clear that the petitioner would not be entitled
\nto any consequential benefit or financial benefit as his pay<\/p>\n
has not been reduced and his conditions of service_has”.not<\/p>\n
been affected and he has already retired on attaining _<\/p>\n
of superannuation on 30.6.2008 and as he is  = .. <\/p>\n
we hold that the order passed by the <\/p>\n
does not call for interference;  Accordingly,  <\/p>\n
disposed of.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Sri D Hucchanarasiah vs State Of Karnataka on 7 September, 2010 Author: V.G.Sabhahit And K.Govindarajulu ” ‘AND-If’ E IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER PRESENT THE HONELE MR JUSTICEII O AND THE HONBLE MR JUSTIOCEV K GOxIII*\u00bbIDARA.;I.1_IL.I_I WRIT PETITION QF 2003 BETWEEN: SR1 […]<\/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-52051","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSri D Hucchanarasiah vs State Of Karnataka on 7 September, 2010 - 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\/sri-d-hucchanarasiah-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-7-september-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sri D Hucchanarasiah vs State Of Karnataka on 7 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-d-hucchanarasiah-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-7-september-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-09-06T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-03-04T15:55:47+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=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-d-hucchanarasiah-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-7-september-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-d-hucchanarasiah-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-7-september-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sri D Hucchanarasiah vs State Of Karnataka on 7 September, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-09-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-03-04T15:55:47+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-d-hucchanarasiah-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-7-september-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1491,\"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\/sri-d-hucchanarasiah-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-7-september-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-d-hucchanarasiah-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-7-september-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-d-hucchanarasiah-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-7-september-2010\",\"name\":\"Sri D Hucchanarasiah vs State Of Karnataka on 7 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-09-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-03-04T15:55:47+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-d-hucchanarasiah-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-7-september-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-d-hucchanarasiah-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-7-september-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-d-hucchanarasiah-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-7-september-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sri D Hucchanarasiah vs State Of Karnataka on 7 September, 2010\"}]},{\"@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":"Sri D Hucchanarasiah vs State Of Karnataka on 7 September, 2010 - 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\/sri-d-hucchanarasiah-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-7-september-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sri D Hucchanarasiah vs State Of Karnataka on 7 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-d-hucchanarasiah-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-7-september-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-09-06T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-03-04T15:55:47+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":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-d-hucchanarasiah-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-7-september-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-d-hucchanarasiah-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-7-september-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sri D Hucchanarasiah vs State Of Karnataka on 7 September, 2010","datePublished":"2010-09-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-03-04T15:55:47+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-d-hucchanarasiah-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-7-september-2010"},"wordCount":1491,"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\/sri-d-hucchanarasiah-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-7-september-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-d-hucchanarasiah-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-7-september-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-d-hucchanarasiah-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-7-september-2010","name":"Sri D Hucchanarasiah vs State Of Karnataka on 7 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-09-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-03-04T15:55:47+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-d-hucchanarasiah-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-7-september-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-d-hucchanarasiah-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-7-september-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-d-hucchanarasiah-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-7-september-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sri D Hucchanarasiah vs State Of Karnataka on 7 September, 2010"}]},{"@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\/52051","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=52051"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/52051\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=52051"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=52051"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=52051"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}