Search: section 68

3 results for “section 68”+ Section 928clear

Sorted by relevance

SMT GEETHA PANDIT RAO vs. THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA

In the result, for the foregoing reasons and applying

WP/7717/2020HC Karnataka30 Nov 2020

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice E.S. Indiresh Writ Petition No.7717 Of 2020 (Lb-Res) & Writ Petition No.226494 Of 2020

928, observed thus: "The retrospectivity is liable to be decided on the few touch stones as: (i) the words used must be expressly provided or clearly implied retrospective operation; (ii) the retrospectivity must be reasonable and not excessive or harsh, otherwise it runs the risk of being struck down as unconstitutional; (iii) where the legislation is introduced to overcome

GEETHA PANDIT RAO AND ANR vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS

In the result, for the foregoing reasons and applying

WP/226494/2020HC Karnataka30 Nov 2020

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice E.S. Indiresh Writ Petition No.7717 Of 2020 (Lb-Res) & Writ Petition No.226494 Of 2020

SMT GEETHA PANDIT RAO vs. THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA

GEETHA PANDIT RAO AND ANR vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS

SMT GEETHA PANDIT RAO vs. THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA

GEETHA PANDIT RAO AND ANR vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS

MANOHAR N. ANKAD AND ORS vs. GEENERAL MANAGER (CHIEF EXECUTIVE) AND ORS