{"id":95802,"date":"2009-09-16T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-09-15T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-p-n-munirathnam-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-16-september-2009"},"modified":"2015-06-12T07:34:33","modified_gmt":"2015-06-12T02:04:33","slug":"sri-p-n-munirathnam-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-16-september-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-p-n-munirathnam-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-16-september-2009","title":{"rendered":"Sri P N Munirathnam vs The State Of Karnataka on 16 September, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Sri P N Munirathnam vs The State Of Karnataka on 16 September, 2009<\/div>\n
Author: V.Gopalagowda And K.Bhakthavatsala<\/div>\n
I IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE\nDATED THIS THE 1631 DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2009\n\nPRESENT\n\nTHE HONBLE Mr.JUSTICE VGOPALA    _\n\nAND\n\nTHE HON'BLE DLJUSTICE  \n\nWRIT APPEAL Nos.3299'-3300  it \n\nBEWVEEN:\n\n1. Sri P.N.Munirathna_1--n\u00a7'-- _\nAged about 57 years,  D  g\nS \/ 0 late Periappa Rec'.d.y;*V. '\nResiding at..1\\:Q'.2.6\/\u00a33, _  _  \ngarwg' Cross,   'V     \n\nParimala   \" \nNaridin_i Lay::n,1.1_;.''', ''  . _'\nBangalore\u00e9 560.  . H  V\u00bb ' \" \n\n2. Sri ManD\u00e9:he\"G0wdDa,, \nAged about\"  ye afs,\nA  0 :1-ateVv%_Gundai-ah;\n\n. ' xResiCiing  N0. 1 1,\nA   % 1 ..J;'C.Nagar,\n' ~_ \"1':\/Iah\u00a3t1\u00e91Eksh;niipura1n,\n\nN I3anga%}Cr_e;D560 096. ...APPELLANTS\n\n\"  iv ' ~ _  ' (Sri VI Igkshminmayana, Adv.)\n\n     The State of Kamataka,\n\nBy its Principal Secretary,\nEnergr Department\nVikas Soudha,\nDr.Ambedkar Road,\nBangaiore-560 O0 1.\n\n\\K\\\/\n\n\n\n953'\n\nEx)\n\nKarnataka Power Transmission\nCorporation Limited\n\nKaveri Bhavan.\n\nBangalore~5BO 009,\nRepresented by its\n\nManaging Director.\n\n. The Managing Director,\n\nBESCOM.\nK.R.Circ1e,\nBanga1ore~5BO 002.\n\nT he Managing Director,\nMESCOM, V  p_\nMangalore.  to\n\n. The ManagingV'D'ireeto'r;  V\n\nGESCOM,  '   \nG1,t1baI':'3?\u00b0*i'\u00a7t it C    \u00bb\n\nKPTC ~smpioyee.s.?_ Union, ~ \n\nRegd. No.A6'5.Q _'A'?.Station Compound\nAmanda 'Rao C.i;'rz:.le- _   \" p '\nBanga1ore-56'Q ooo, \"  \nRepresented by_its_ \n\nGeneral Secretary. '\n\n sr: Nlf\ufb02agaraj,\n\n ,' o \"iatef M, Munivenkatappa.\n\n ._ 'Aged'  years\n' Working as Assistant Executive\n\nEngineer\" (Electrical),\nBE'S_C'OM. Corporation,\n\n \" rI\u00a7.R.Circ1e,\nx _pB:angalore--56O O02.\n\n. . . RESPONDENTS\n\n   (Sri D.N.Nanjunda Reddy. Sr.Counse1 for R7'. Srnt.Asha\n'M.Kum'oarag'irimath, HCGP for R1)\n\nThis WA is \ufb02ied under Section 4 of the Karnataka\n\nHigh Court Act praying to set aside the order passed in\nthe writ petition No.1800~1801\/2009 dated 24.04.2009.\n\n\\\/\n\n\n\nThis WA coming on for preliminary hearing this\nday, G-OPALA GOWDA, J. delivered the foliowingz\n\nJUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
The correctness of the order of the learned:tsingle\ufb02i 0′<\/p>\n
Judge dated 24th April 2009 pdss\u00e9dian’0.iw.;r$\u00a7i\u00a7rd._ise09002<\/p>\n
1801\/ 2009 in dismissing the writ’i__p’etitiondnoniinatidng0′<\/p>\n
the 791 respondent herein  of. the  the
\nDirectors of the 2110* 00e00gi’1<drndtakd'd Power
\nTransmission Corporation'i,i1n'ited  called as
\n"KPTCL" in   appeal urging
\nvarious  single Judge after
\nadvertizjyigdddtot _th0eWriVa1 legal contentions
\nurged o'n..V_g4behai._f; "Jparties, the definition of<\/p>\n
"worlgrnan" under"$ect'ion 2(s] of the Industrial Disputes<\/p>\n
  Ar'ti_c1e  of the Constitution of India<\/p>\n
dregarfdingd'~VWor}i'ers Participation in Management of<\/p>\n
it _ Indu'stri'es,'v':"" referring to clause 30(1)[a) of the<\/p>\n
it0.'-44"'g..r,.\u00a7\/ieznorandum of Articles of association of the KPTCL,<\/p>\n
-0  hasdregected the legal contentions urged on behalf of the<\/p>\n
 “a\u00a75pe11ants herein and affirxned the nomination of the<\/p>\n
seventh respondent, KPTCL by recording reasons. The<\/p>\n
Correctness of the same ioned in this appeal<\/p>\n
inviting our attention to Article 43A of the Constitution
\nof India which reads thus:\n<\/p>\n
“The State shall take steps, by suitab_1e.::’~.._4d_i’~._<\/p>\n
legislation or in any other way to secure;”thef_~  <\/p>\n
participation of the workers  in<\/p>\n
management of  unde’rta1%<ii1\u00a7s, V  I<\/p>\n
establishments or other'; }j_Argani2:–a'tio:ns  <\/p>\n
engaged in any industry_'*;~–.\n<\/p>\n
2. The learned oounsei’ -..i”\\_:r1.r’.V,Lakshminarayana
\nsubmits that the single JJ_’ud’ge\u00a73has–4′ “considered the
\neffect of Article  of i\ufb01onstitutdionof India which states
\nthat workers’  participation by way of
\nnomination’    of management of the<\/p>\n
indirrstriesii’—._’i”nepi”-joard  management of the KPTCL is<\/p>\n
“”~..Vreq.nir.ed_gp’ to rrianage its affairs for its effective<\/p>\n
 rthe interest of public. The seventh<\/p>\n
respondentisiineither a workmannor a supervisor of the<\/p>\n
 therefore his nomination as Director of the<\/p>\n
 of Management is not iegai and vaiid. The<\/p>\n
hvvcreation of a post of Working President by the<\/p>\n
 Employees Union and coopting him as member is not<\/p>\n
provided under Ruie i1(d} [ix] of the Karnataka Power<\/p>\n
\\\/<\/p>\n
Transmission Corporation Employees Union Rules and<\/p>\n
Regulations. Therefore, cooption of the seventh<\/p>\n
respondent as a member of the Union and <\/p>\n
as an office bearer of the Union as provided’ ‘<\/p>\n
clause (:1 to (viii) of Rule 11(;at1″dfer\u00ab the mes :_andH”‘.<\/p>\n
Regulations of the Union is totallyV\u00e9iinpermisstblpev in <\/p>\n
it is submitted by the learnedeotlnsell”on”behalf  the<\/p>\n
appellants that in    ‘woriier’ being<\/p>\n
mentioned under clause -‘thhefniernorandum of<\/p>\n
articles of   constitutional<\/p>\n
definitionof  referred to therein<\/p>\n
shall be’-.gi’v\u00a7<;n efreet::te,f"le-air the same shail be read into<\/p>\n
clause 30(ul}'{a} 'n.otwitIf1standing the challenge to the said<\/p>\n
  the Mxemorandum of Articles of Association.<\/p>\n
"the matter has not been taken into<\/p>\n
 by the learned single Judge while<\/p>\n
7..\u00ab,_’*.examining the correctness of the creation of the post of<\/p>\n
   President by the Union in exercise of its power<\/p>\n
 ,…j.A:g”.gu_rider Rule 11(d][ix) of the Union and coopting the<\/p>\n
V’ seventh respondent as a member of the union in<\/p>\n
invoking its power under Rule ll[c] is totally<\/p>\n
\\\\\/i<\/p>\n
impermissible in law. Therefore, the State government<\/p>\n
has not properly considered the above legal aspec.ts–.\u00bbat<\/p>\n
the time of nomination of seventh respondent ” V.<\/p>\n
the Board of Directors of KPTCL repre_senting= <\/p>\n
workers by exarnining Article  <\/p>\n
and the clause 30[1)[a) of the.4_Memorandum–“‘–rJtArticglelsi A<\/p>\n
of Association of the Corpcr_ati.on.   the
\nimpugned order  is
\nvitiated in law.    is not
\nconsidered  examining
\nthe  Hence this writ
\nappeal  Court to set aside the<\/p>\n
order impiignevdgllinlAthis.:_ll~~’iappeal and quash the order<\/p>\n
 v  in the”writ..petition.\n<\/p>\n
 leai’ned senior counsel Sri D.L.Nanjunda<\/p>\n
V dd _ Recldy, has’ sought to justify the order impugned in the<\/p>\n
.i,.:\\:2vri.t_.4petition and also the order of the learned single<\/p>\n
.l   contending that the State Government is<\/p>\n
” ernpowered to exercise its power to nominate or appoint<\/p>\n
the Directors and the Board sf Directors of the KPTCL<\/p>\n
including the of\ufb01ce bearer of the employees union to<\/p>\n
\\i\/<\/p>\n
the State Government as one of the Board of Directors<\/p>\n
of the KPTCL is rightly upheld by the learned single<\/p>\n
Judge by adverting to the rival legal contentio_nsV_fa_:nd<\/p>\n
recording Valid reasons, the same cannot be ter.re.edv…_.’r.<\/p>\n
either as erroneous or error in laW;.\u00bb.hence_’he’ ‘has. F5133-.eelr.v ” ”<\/p>\n
for dismissal of this appeal as :”t.he:._A_’o*r’ders_”i:rnpt1gi’1eVdT[<\/p>\n
either in this appeal or wrif<rP\u00a7titio'11i_'do'  * it<\/p>\n
interference by this Court in"*'e.\u00a7:ercise of"its. appellate<\/p>\n
jurisdiction and power. 'A<\/p>\n
4.  it  said rival legal<\/p>\n
contentions: counsel on behalf of
\nthe parties,4’we  our mind to the provisions<\/p>\n
of  rules aiidgglrelgulations of the union with reference<\/p>\n
 l}(a)  the memorandum of Articles of<\/p>\n
 KPTCL and also Article 43A of the<\/p>\n
V . Constitution’. With a View to appreciate the above legai<\/p>\n
kl’A4l–.::ccntenti’ons and find out as to whether the impugned<\/p>\n
-‘   challenged in this writ appeal is vitiated either on<\/p>\n
” “the ground of erroneous reasoning or error in law? and<\/p>\n
(ii) what order’? \\\/<\/p>\n
5. The aforesaid points are to be answered against<\/p>\n
the appellants and in favour of the seventh respondent<\/p>\n
and the first respondent State GoVernrnent.g.._for”‘ftheV<\/p>\n
following reasons:\n<\/p>\n
There is no need for us to elaborately <\/p>\n
relevant provisions of Employees z:n.:o\u00b0n._ or   loft <\/p>\n
Constitution of India andlllelaiise 3(:}(‘l}-l(.a} l\ufb02ofm the
\nMemorandum of ArticleL_s”‘0f  gr theK13″rcL for
\nthe reasons that the  Judge has<\/p>\n
elaborately    “order, While dealing<\/p>\n
with the ri\\lzAalvl.j’l.egal.lplooritentionsl urged by the learned
\ncounsel in.__the   We have gone through the<\/p>\n
reasoning portiondof the learned single Judge on the<\/p>\n
 I V  that arose for his consideration. The<\/p>\n
 has taken pains to refer to the<\/p>\n
 _ factual V-poslltion, the rival legal contentious and<\/p>\n
it  ,ner:ee_ssary relevant constitutional provisions, Rules and<\/p>\n
Regulations of the Employees Union. The Rules and<\/p>\n
 “Regulations and clause 30(l)(a} of the Memorandum of<\/p>\n
it Articles of Association of the KPTCL and correctly<\/p>\n
interpreted and examined  ower of the State<\/p>\n
10<\/span><\/p>\n
Government, keeping in View clause 30{1}{a) of the<\/p>\n
Memorandum of Articles of Association. As riglitly<\/p>\n
pointed out by the learned counsel V.Lakshminara.:ya:ia”‘ <\/p>\n
on behalf of the appellants that the seventh”re.spondent*’–.’  <\/p>\n
is not a Worker therefore his parti:j::’ipatior1″in the_.:e’l.ecVtion <\/p>\n
of the Employees Union to norriinatepvlhirm  ‘oi
\nDirectors representing  of   not
\npermissible in law and of the
\nconstitutional mandate  of the
\nConstitution      submitted that
\ncreating”th;3–…post.;_::pot” as per the Rules
\nand l  to coopt him as the<\/p>\n
seventh revspondent  rnember of the union cannot be<\/p>\n
 Ethel'”c0.I1.stitutiona1 de\ufb01nition is the law<\/p>\n
%.i”\u00a2-M \u00a3>’%.3l:\\>:\u00a3C%v\\\u00bba~i~ \ufb01t.<\/p>\n
   the largeri Bench judgment in<\/p>\n
KEsHAvA\u00a7i;atipA B!-IARATI Vs. STATE 01%’ KERALA<\/p>\n
 “reported ‘in AIR 1973 SC 1461 as well as SYNTHETICS<\/p>\n
  ‘t?lja;tc”:mM1cAL LTD. Vs. STATE or map. reported in AIR<\/p>\n
 1990 SC 1927. This aspect of the matter is neither<\/p>\n
 considered by the State G t nor examined by<\/p>\n
the learned single Judge at the time of passing the<\/p>\n
impugned order.\n<\/p>\n
6. We have also examined this legal aspect,’ <\/p>\n
matter very carefully. The object of    <\/p>\n
Constitution is that it has to give  reprejse’ntatio:n  <\/p>\n
workers in the Board of Managernlentof
\nThe de\ufb01nition of worker  gsaild’-.\n<\/p>\n
provision must be    that who
\ncan represent the  for better<\/p>\n
management_   liii” the interest of<\/p>\n
public    common goal of the
\nConstitutiori :ha+:_\u00a3;\u00a7\u00a21r;1ajie:i’ai resource shall be for the<\/p>\n
conirrionggpgoodprotrided under Article 39 (b) of the<\/p>\n
 Constitiitian India. The power corporation is material<\/p>\n
resourcev  .nthe’refore it has to sub–serve the common<\/p>\n
 _ good, Whiclli is the constitutional philosophy as<\/p>\n
 it   _e11V,isaged: under the above provision of the Constitution.<\/p>\n
V   If the argument of the learned counsel for the<\/p>\n
it  appellant that the seventh respondent is not a Workman<\/p>\n
 and therefore he could not have been nominated by the<\/p>\n
‘l<\\\u00ab\/<\/p>\n
satis\ufb01ed that the State Government, after applying its<\/p>\n
mind has exercised its power under clause 30(4l)g(a)r"of<\/p>\n
the Memorandum of Articles of Associa..tion'\u00ab _<\/p>\n
nominated seventh respondent as "one of 'thve:_E'~oard* loft.' "<\/p>\n
Directors by giving representation to"rt1r1e'iwo'rkers:'an\u00e9i1;_'<\/p>\n
that has been affirmed by  single bir
\nrecording reasons in   are"inV._Agrevspectfu1
\nagreement with the  the learned
\nsingle Judge in_t;he_   foregoing
\nreasons,    if   whatsoever to
\ninterfere w*1t'l~1~    single Judge,
\nhence the   appeal.\n<\/p>\n
Accordingly appeal is lldisinissed.<\/p>\n
Sd\/-\n<\/p>\n
FUDGE<\/p>\n
Sd\/w
\nJUDGE<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Sri P N Munirathnam vs The State Of Karnataka on 16 September, 2009 Author: V.Gopalagowda And K.Bhakthavatsala I IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 1631 DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2009 PRESENT THE HONBLE Mr.JUSTICE VGOPALA _ AND THE HON’BLE DLJUSTICE WRIT APPEAL Nos.3299′-3300 it BEWVEEN: 1. Sri P.N.Munirathna_1–n\u00a7’– […]<\/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-95802","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSri P N Munirathnam vs The State Of Karnataka on 16 September, 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\/sri-p-n-munirathnam-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-16-september-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sri P N Munirathnam vs The State Of Karnataka on 16 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-p-n-munirathnam-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-16-september-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=\"2009-09-15T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-06-12T02:04:33+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-p-n-munirathnam-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-16-september-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-p-n-munirathnam-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-16-september-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sri P N Munirathnam vs The State Of Karnataka on 16 September, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-09-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-06-12T02:04:33+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-p-n-munirathnam-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-16-september-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1480,\"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-p-n-munirathnam-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-16-september-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-p-n-munirathnam-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-16-september-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-p-n-munirathnam-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-16-september-2009\",\"name\":\"Sri P N Munirathnam vs The State Of Karnataka on 16 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-09-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-06-12T02:04:33+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-p-n-munirathnam-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-16-september-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-p-n-munirathnam-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-16-september-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-p-n-munirathnam-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-16-september-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sri P N Munirathnam vs The State Of Karnataka on 16 September, 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":"Sri P N Munirathnam vs The State Of Karnataka on 16 September, 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\/sri-p-n-munirathnam-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-16-september-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sri P N Munirathnam vs The State Of Karnataka on 16 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-p-n-munirathnam-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-16-september-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-09-15T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-06-12T02:04:33+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-p-n-munirathnam-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-16-september-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-p-n-munirathnam-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-16-september-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sri P N Munirathnam vs The State Of Karnataka on 16 September, 2009","datePublished":"2009-09-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-06-12T02:04:33+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-p-n-munirathnam-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-16-september-2009"},"wordCount":1480,"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-p-n-munirathnam-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-16-september-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-p-n-munirathnam-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-16-september-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-p-n-munirathnam-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-16-september-2009","name":"Sri P N Munirathnam vs The State Of Karnataka on 16 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-09-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-06-12T02:04:33+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-p-n-munirathnam-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-16-september-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-p-n-munirathnam-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-16-september-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-p-n-munirathnam-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-16-september-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sri P N Munirathnam vs The State Of Karnataka on 16 September, 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\/95802","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=95802"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/95802\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=95802"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=95802"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=95802"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}