2020 (1) TMI 1436

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....W SRI VIKRAM HUILGOL, HCGP For the Respondent : SRI K.N. PHANINDRA, SR. ADVOCATE FOR SMT. VAISHALI HEGDE, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2; SRI ADARSH GANGAL, ADVOCATE FOR R2(A); SRI MANJUNATH SREEDHAR HEGDE, ADVOCATE FOR R2(B TO E); SRI K.C.E. MANJUNATH FOR R2(F); SRI SRIKANTH PATIL K, ADVOCATE FOR R2(G); SRI SWAMINI G. MOHANAMBAL, ADVOCATE FOR R2(H); SRI B. R. SRIVATSA, ADVOCATE FOR R3 ORDER Heard the learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the Petitioners and the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the first respondent. The first Petitioner is the State of Karnataka and the other two Petitioners are the officers of the State Government. 2. The following order was passed by the State of Karnataka on 26th September 2018: "The pro....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....claimed a declaration that the order dated 26thSeptember 2018 is null and void. 5. When this petition came up for consideration on 12thSeptember 2019, this Court stayed the operation of the direction contained in paragraph 31 of the impugned order. Being aggrieved by the said order, the first respondent and others filed Civil Appeal Nos.9170, 9171, 9172 of 2019 before the Apex Court. By the judgment and order dated 3rd December 2019, the said appeals have dismissed. Our attention is invited to paragraph 45 of the said judgment and order whereby, the Apex Court has answered the first question formulated by it. Paragraph 45 reads thus: "45. Therefore, in fine, our answer to the first question would be that NCLT did not have jurisdiction to....