WP 40994/2002 Karnataka High Court Order on 20/08/2013

High Court of Karnataka
Daily Orders of the Case Number : WP  40994/2002 for the date of order 20/09/2013

Honble Justice RAM MOHAN REDDY & H.BILLAPPA 20/09/2013 Order in WP  40994/2002 The fourth respondent – Society files a memo dated 20.9.2013 in compliance with the specific proposals contained in the earlier memo dated 5.4.2013 and a further memo dated 23.8.2013. To the memo is enclosed Annexure-R4(L) containing a list of 18 numbers of sites with their property numbers and the areas comprised therein which according to the learned Senior Counsel for the fourth respondent are free-hold properties to be handed over to the Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike by way of release-cum-relinquishment deeds, to reduce the shortfall in the civic amenity areas comprised in the layout in question. Annexure-R4(N) is said to contain relevant material particulars of the boundaries and the extents comprised in the 18 sites mentioned in Annexure-R4(L), while, Annexure-R4(M) is said to be a letter addressed to the Joint Commissioner of Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike, Yelhanka Range, with the acknowledgement over the proposal to concede in favour of the Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike the said sites. Learned Senior Counsel for the fourth respondent Society submits that the fourth respondent is ready and willing to ensure a joint spot inspection of the said 18 numbers of sites, with the officials of the Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike and execute release-cum-relinquishment deed/s. Sri.K.V.Narasimhan, learned counsel for the Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike, submits that the Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike is willing to have a joint spot inspection of the said sites, conducted at about 11.00 a.m. on Tuesday i.e., on 24.09.2013 and if found to be freehold sites to take possession of the same where afterwards the respondent No.4  Society to execute the release-cum-relinquishment deeds on Wednesday i.e., on 25.09.2013. In the memo, at paragraph No.3, it is stated that Annexure R4(P) is a tabular statement containing list of all known disputes and litigations respecting certain properties. Learned Senior Counsel submits that better particulars of the litigation would be made available to the Court by the next date of hearing. Learned Senior Counsel points to the lay-out map annexed to the memo dated 5.4.2013 to submit that the fourth respondent would explore the possibility of including the road adjacent to block No.7 which stands redundant so as to form a part of the other areas in Block No.7, to be handed over to the Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike, to further reduce shortfall in the civic amenity area. Sri.Papireddy, learned counsel for the applicant in I.A.Nos.VI and VII of 2013, submits that the fourth respondent Society having not kept up its promise has resulted in these applications. The fourth respondent  Society to file its response to each of the applications. The fourth respondentSociety to comply with the requirement of joint inspection and execution of release-cum-relinquishment deed as indicated supra. List this matter on 25.10.2013.

How to Punish Constitutional Rapists! A Novel Way?

 

FB 645-Q: When Courts are treated as Mothers by Honest Judges; here are 867 Judges & Lokayuktas who Rape High Court & Supreme Court ! Mother Fuckers?

Digvijay Mote shared Digvijay Mote‘s photo.

3 minutes ago 2300 hrs 20 September, 2013

FB 645-Q: When Courts are treated as Mothers by Honest Judges; here are 867 Judges & Lokayuktas who Rape High Court & Supreme Court ! Mother Fuckers?:- 95% Judges og Karnataka High Court names of rapists are below:-
………………….( 33 ) Lastly we are constrained to observe above the serious allegations made against the Judges of the Court ( sitting, retired, transferred) and retired Judges of the Supreme Court in the Public Interest Litigation filed by the two Practicing Advocates of this Bar. In the case reported in P. PERUMAL & ORS vs. STATE OF TAMILNADU &ORS ( 33. 1993-2 LW 681 ) at page 712 at para 41 Mishra, J., as he then was has stated thus:

” 41. In a nutshell, it will be no exaggeration if it is said that the High Court Judges are high dignitaries, who by virtue of their office and the nature of work, that is to say, dispensation of justice, exercise a regal or sovereign function; their work forms part of Constitutional duty of the State and they discharge inalienable functions of the Constitutional Government, which no one else is entitled to perform . They have to be aloof to some extent from others. These and other acts which Judges perform make them the object of regard and respect of others.

Their functions as demanded by their office make them important for the Society.”

50.B. Beneficiaries of this Judgment are the Hon’ble Judges of Karnataka High Court, shows that nearly 90% to 95% Judges constituting Karnataka High Court, is presented by collating with great difficulty the Tear, Names etc., from 1980 to 2001-02 is in the box below:-

1980: Chief Justice Mr. D.M. Chandrashekhar. K.Bhimiah, V.S.Malimath, K.Jagannath Shetty, M.S.Nesargi, M.N. Venkatachaliaha, M.Rama Jois, K.S. Puttaswamy, N.Venkatachala, N.R.Kudoor, G.N.Sabahit, N.D.Venkatesh, M.S.Patil , R.S.Mahendra , R.G.Desai, K.A.Swami , D.R. Vitthal Rao.

Not Involved: M.K. Srinivas Iyengar ,P.P.Bopanna, M.P.Chndrakant Raj Urs , M.Nagappa ,

1981 : Chief Justice Mr. D.M. Chandrashekhar. K.Bhimiah, V.S.Malimath, K.Jagannath Shetty, M.S.Nesargi, M.K. Srinivas Iyengar , M.N. Venkatachaliaha, M.Rama Jois, K.S. Puttaswamy, P.P.Bopanna, N.Venkatachala, N.R.Kudoor, G.N.Sabahit, N.D.Venkatesh, M.P.Chndrakant Raj Urs , M.S.Patil , R.S.Mahendra, M.Nagappa , K.A.Swami , D.R. Vitthal Rao, P.A.Kulkarni.

,……..Not Involved: M.K. Srinivas Iyengar ,P.P.Bopanna, M.P.Chndrakant Raj Urs , M.Nagappa ,,……..

1982 : Chief Justice Mr. D.M. Chandrashekhar. K.Bhimiah, V.S.Malimath, K.Jagannath Shetty, M.S.Nesargi, M.N. Venkatachaliaha, M.Rama Jois, K.S. Puttaswamy, P.P.Bopanna, N.Venkatachala, N.R.Kudoor, G.N.Sabahit , N.D.Venkatesh, M.P.Chndrakant Raj Urs , M.S.Patil , R.S.Mahendra, M.Nagappa[D] , K.A.Swami , D.R. Vitthal Rao, P.A.Kulkarni , A.K.Laxmeshwar , S.G.Doddakale Gowda.

,……..Not Involved:P.P.Bopanna, M.P.Chndrakant Raj Urs , M.Nagappa ,,……..

1983 : Ag. Chief Justice V.S.Malimath, K.Jagannath Shetty, M.S.Nesargi, M.N. Venkatachaliaha, M.Rama Jois, K.S. Puttaswamy, P.P.Bopanna, N.Venkatachala, N.R.Kudoor, G.N.Sabahit , N.D.Venkatesh, M.P.Chndrakant Raj Urs , M.S.Patil , R.S.Mahendra, R.G.Desai, K.A.Swami , D.R. Vitthal Rao, P.A.Kulkarni , A.K.Laxmeshwar , S.G.Doddakale Gowda , S.R. Rajshekharmurthy , M.Ramkrishna

Note: Justice M.Ramakrishna Biodata: Appointed District Judge in 1977 but resigned soon thereafter. Elevated as a Judge High Court of Karnataka on 10-01-1983.Appointed Chief Justice of Jammu & Kashmir High Court on 10.10.1994 and later Chief Justice of the Gauhati High Court on 18.06.1997.

……. Not Involved:P.P.Bopanna, M.P.Chndrakant Raj Urs , M.Nagappa ,……..

1984 : Chief Justice V.S.Malimath, K.Jagannath Shetty, M.S.Nesargi, M.N. Venkatachaliaha, M.Rama Jois, K.S. Puttaswamy, P.P.Bopanna, N.Venkatachala, N.R.Kudoor, G.N.Sabahit , N.D.Venkatesh, M.P.Chndrakant Raj Urs , M.S.Patil , R.S.Mahendra, R.G.Desai, K.A.Swami , D.R. Vitthal Rao, P.A.Kulkarni , A.K.Laxmeshwar , S.G.Doddakale Gowda , S.R. Rajshekharmurthy , M.Ramkrishna , B.Muralidher Rao , S.A. Hakeem.

…..Not Involved:P.P.Bopanna, M.P.Chndrakant Raj Urs , M.Nagappa ,…..

1985 :Chief Justice K.Jagannath Shetty, M.S.Nesargi, M.N. Venkatachaliaha, M.Rama Jois, K.S. Puttaswamy, P.P.Bopanna, N.Venkatachala, N.R.Kudoor, N.D.Venkatesh, M.P.Chndrakant Raj Urs , M.S.Patil , R.S.Mahendra, R.G.Desai, K.A.Swami , D.R. Vitthal Rao, P.A.Kulkarni , A.K.Laxmeshwar , S.G.Doddakale Gowda , S.R. Rajshekharmurthy , M.Ramkrishna , B.Muralidher Rao , S.A. Hakeem

Registrar: R.C. Ijari . A.G: Santosh Hegde.

…..Not Involved:P.P.Bopanna, M.P.Chndrakant Raj Urs , B.Muralidher Rao ……

1986 : Chief Justice K.Jagannath Shetty, M.S.Nesargi, M.N. Venkatachaliaha, M.Rama Jois, K.S. Puttaswamy, P.P.Bopanna, N.Venkatachala, N.R.Kudoor, N.D.Venkatesh, M.P.Chndrakant Raj Urs , M.S.Patil , R.S.Mahendra, R.G.Desai, K.A.Swami , D.R. Vitthal Rao, P.A.Kulkarni , A.K.Laxmeshwar , S.G.Doddakale Gowda , S.R. Rajshekharmurthy , M.Ramkrishna , B.Muralidher Rao , S.A. Hakeem

Registrar: R.C. Ijari . A.G: Santosh Hegde.

……..Not Involved:P.P.Bopanna, M.P.Chndrakant Raj Urs , B.Muralidher Rao ……

1987 : Chief Justice P.C.Jain , M.S.Nesargi, M.N. Venkatachaliaha, M.Rama Jois, P.P.Bopanna, N.Venkatachala, M.P.Chndrakant Raj Urs , M.S.Patil , R.G.Desai, K.A.Swami , D.R. Vitthal Rao, P.A.Kulkarni , A.K.Laxmeshwar , S.G.Doddakale Gowda , S.R. Rajshekharmurthy , M.Ramkrishna , B.Muralidher Rao , S.A. Hakeem , K.Shiva Shankar Bhat, P.K.Shyam Sunder, K.B.Navadagi, H.G.Balakrishna .

Registrar: B.Jagannath Hegde A.G: Santosh Hegde . KAT Chairman N.D.Venkatesh

…….Not Involved:Chief Justice P.C.Jain ,P.P.Bopanna, M.P.Chndrakant Raj Urs , B.Muralidher Rao ……

1988: Chief Justice P.C.Jain ,M.Rama Jois, P.P.Bopanna, N.Venkatachala, M.P.Chndrakant Raj Urs ,K.A.Swami , D.R. Vitthal Rao, S.G.Doddakale Gowda , S.R. Rajshekharmurthy , M.Ramkrishna , B.Muralidher Rao , S.A. Hakeem , K.Shiva Shankar Bhat, P.K.Shyam Sunder, K.B.Navadagi, D.P.Hiremath, H.G.Balakrishna , S.Rajendra Babu, K.Ramachanriaha .

Registrar: B.Jagannath Hegde A.G: T.N. Narasinha Murthy.

……Not-Involved:Chief Justice P.C.Jain ,P.P.Bopanna, M.P.Chndrakant Raj Urs , B.Muralidher Rao…….

1989: Chief Justice P.C.Jain , M.Rama Jois, P.P.Bopanna, N.Venkatachala, M.P.Chndrakant Raj Urs ,K.A.Swami , D.R. Vitthal Rao, A.K.Laxmeshwar , S.G.Doddakale Gowda , S.R. Rajshekharmurthy , M.Ramkrishna , B.Muralidher Rao , S.A. Hakeem , K.Shiva Shankar Bhat, P.K.Shyam Sunder, K.B.Navadagi, H.G.Balakrishna , S.Rajendra Babu, K.Ramachanriaha .

Registrar: B.Jagannath Hegde A.G: C. Shivappa.

…….Not Involved:Chief Justice P.C.Jain ,P.P.Bopanna, M.P.Chndrakant Raj Urs , B.Muralidher Rao …..

1990: Chief Justice S. Mohan , M.Rama Jois, N.Venkatachala, M.P.Chndrakant Raj Urs , K.A.Swami , D.R. Vitthal Rao, A.K.Laxmeshwar , S.G.Doddakale Gowda , S.R. Rajshekharmurthy , M.Ramkrishna , B.Muralidher Rao , S.A. Hakeem , K.Shiva Shankar Bhat, P.K.Shyam Sunder, K.B.Navadagi, H.G.Balakrishna , S.Rajendra Babu, K.Ramachanriaha , B.P. Singh , G.P.Shiva Prakash, Shivaraj Patil, N.Y.Hanumathappa, B.N.Krishnan, N.D.V. Bhat , M.M.Mirdhe , R. Ramakrishna, B. Jagannath Hegde , K,Jagannath Shetty , A.B. Murgod .

Registrar: S.Venkataraman.

….Not Involved:Chief Justice P.C.Jain ,P.P.Bopanna, M.P.Chndrakant Raj Urs , B.Muralidher Rao …..

1991 ; Chief Justice S. Mohan , M.Rama Jois, N.Venkatachala, M.P.Chndrakant Raj Urs ,K.A.Swami , D.R. Vitthal Rao, S.G.Doddakale Gowda , S.R. Rajshekharmurthy , M.Ramkrishna , B.Muralidher Rao , S.A. Hakeem , K.Shiva Shankar Bhat, P.K.Shyam Sunder, K.B.Navadagi, D.P.Hiremath, H.G.Balakrishna , S.Rajendra Babu, K.Ramachanriaha , G.P.Shiva Prakash, Shivaraj Patil, N.Y.Hanumathappa, B.N.Krishnan, N.D.V. Bhat , M.M.Mirdhe , R. Ramakrishna, B. Jagannath Hegde , K,Jagannath Shetty , A.B. Murgod . Registrar: S.Venkataraman .

…. Not Involved: S.P. Bharucha, M.P.Chndrakant Raj Urs , B.Muralidher Rao , B.P. Singh , ….

1992 ; Ag CJ K.A.Swami , M.Ramkrishna , S.A. Hakeem , K.Shiva Shankar Bhat, P.K.Shyam Sunder, K.B.Navadagi, D.P.Hiremath, S.Rajendra Babu, G.P.Shiva Prakash, Shivaraj Patil, N.Y.Hanumathappa, B.N.Krishnan, N.D.V. Bhat , M.M.Mirdhe , R. Ramakrishna, B. Jagannath Hegde , K,Jagannath Shetty , A.B. Murgod , C.Shivappa , R.V.Vasanthakumar , L. Sreenivas Reddy .

Registrar General : S.Venkataraman .Registrar[V] B.K.Somshekhar . Registrar [J] M.P.Chinnappa . Registrar [A]: C.Shivalingiaha .. . Advocate General:P.P. Muthanna

…. Not Involved:Chief Justice S.P. Bharucha,…….

1993 ; Ag Chief Justice K.A.Swami, M.Ramkrishna , S.A. Hakeem , K.Shiva Shankar Bhat, K.B.Navadagi, D.P.Hiremath, S.Rajendra Babu, G.P.Shiva Prakash, Shivaraj Patil, N.Y.Hanumathappa, B.N.Krishnan, N.D.V. Bhat , M.M.Mirdhe , R. Ramakrishna, B. Jagannath Hegde , K,Jagannath Shetty , A.B. Murgod , C.Shivappa , R.V.Vasanthakumar , L. Sreenivas Reddy , A.J.Sadashiva , K.H.N. Khuranga , R.V. Raveendran , S. Venkataraman .

Registrar General : S.Venkataraman .Registrar[V] B.K.Somshekhar . Registrar [J] M.P.Chinnappa . Registrar [A]: C.Shivalingiaha ..

…. Not Involved:Chief Justice S.P. Bharucha,…Advocate General: P.P. Muthanna….

1994 : M.Ramkrishna , S.A. Hakeem , K.B.Navadagi, S.Rajendra Babu, G.P.Shiva Prakash, N.D.V. Bhat , M.M.Mirdhe , R. Ramakrishna, B. Jagannath Hegde , A.B. Murgod , R.V.Vasanthakumar , L. Sreenivas Reddy , A.J.Sadashiva , K.H.N. Khuranga , R.V. Raveendran , S. Venkataraman , V.P. Mohan Kumar, Kumar Rajaratnam, T.C. Chuta , B.S Raikote, R.J. Babu, S.R. Nayak, B.K. Somshekhar, R.G.Vaidyanatha, T.S. Thakur, P.I.Krishna Moorthy , J.Eshwar Prasad.

Registrar General : M.P.Chinnappa .Registrar[V] G.Patri Basavana Goud . Registrar [J] . T. Abdul Mujeeb Registrar [A]: C.Shivalingiaha .

Note: Justice M.Ramakrishna Biodata: Appointed Chief Justice of Jammu & Kashmir High Court on 10.10.1994 and later Chief Justice of the Gauhati High Court on 18.06.1997

…. Not Involved: Chief Justice S.B. Majumdar , …Advocate General: B.V. Achaya……

1995 : Ag. Chief Justice S.A. Hakeem , K.B.Navadagi, S.Rajendra Babu, G.P.Shiva Prakash, M.M.Mirdhe , R. Ramakrishna, G.C. Bharuka , A.B. Murgod , R.V.Vasanthakumar , L. Sreenivas Reddy , H.N. Tilhari, A.J.Sadashiva , K.H.N. Khuranga , R.V. Raveendran , S. Venkataraman , V.P. Mohan Kumar, Kumar Rajaratnam, T.S. Thakur, P.I.Krishna Moorthy , J.Eshwar Prasad , M.B. Vishwanath , C.N. Ashwath Narayan Rao, B.Padmaraj , H.N. Narayan .

Registrar General : M.P.Chinnappa .Registrar[V] G.Patri Basavana Goud . Registrar [J] . T. Abdul Mujeeb Registrar [A]: C.Shivalingiaha .

…. Not Involved: K.S. Bhktavatsalam , M.F. Saldhana ,…Advocate General: B.V. Achaya……

1996 : Ag. Chief Justice S.A. Hakeem, Ag. Chief Justice S.Rajendra Babu, Chief Justice R.P.Sethi , S.Rajendra Babu, P.I.Krishna Moorthy , J.Eshwar Prasad , G.P.Shiva Prakash, M.M.Mirdhe , R. Ramakrishna, G.C. Bharuka , A.B. Murgod , L. Sreenivas Reddy , H.N. Tilhari, A.J.Sadashiva , K.H.N. Khuranga , R.V. Raveendran , S. Venkataraman , V.P. Mohan Kumar, Kumar Rajaratnam, T.S. Thakur, M.B. Vishwanath , C.N. Ashwath Narayan Rao, B.Padmaraj , H.N. Narayan , P.Vishwanath Shetty, A.M. Farooq, Chandrashekaraiah, Chidanad Ullal , H.L. Dattu , B.K. Sanglad, Mohammed Anwar , M.P. Chinnappa , B.N. Mallikarjuna .

Registrar General : V.G. Sabahit .Registrar[V] S.K. Venkat Reddy . Registrar [J] . T. Abdul Mujeeb Registrar [A]: C.Shivalingiaha .

…. Not Involved: K.S. Bhktavatsalam , M.F. Saldhana , …Advocate General: S. Vijay Shankar ……….

1997 : Chief Justice R.P.Sethi ,S.Rajendra Babu, P.I.Krishna Moorthy ,G.P.Shiva Prakash, G.C. Bharuka , H.N. Tilhari, A.J.Sadashiva , K.H.N. Khuranga , R.V. Raveendran , S. Venkataraman , V.P. Mohan Kumar, Kumar Rajaratnam, T.S. Thakur, M.B. Vishwanath , C.N. Ashwath Narayan Rao, B.Padmaraj , H.N. Narayan , P.Vishwanath Shetty, A.M. Farooq, Chandrashekaraiah, Chidanad Ullal , H.L. Dattu , B.K. Sanglad, Mohammed Anwar , M.P. Chinnappa , B.N. Mallikarjuna .

Additional Judges: B.S. Sreenivas Rao , G.Patri Basavana Goud , S.R. Venkatesh Murthy , T.N. Vallinayagam .

Registrar General : V.G. Sabahit . Registrar[V] S.K. Venkat Reddy . Registrar [J] . H.G. Ramesh Registrar [A]: C.Shivalingiaha .

…. Not Involved: M.F. Saldhana , …Advocate General: S. Vijay Shankar ……….

1998 : Chief Justice R.P.Sethi , Y. Bhaskar Rao , G.C. Bharuka , V.K. Singhal , L. Sreenivas Reddy , H.N. Tilhari, A.J.Sadashiva , K.H.N. Khuranga , R.V. Raveendran , V.P. Mohan Kumar, Kumar Rajaratnam, T.S. Thakur, M.B. Vishwanath , C.N. Ashwath Narayan Rao, B.Padmaraj , H.N. Narayan , P.Vishwanath Shetty, A.M. Farooq, Chandrashekaraiah, Chidanad Ullal , H.L. Dattu , B.K. Sanglad, Mohammed Anwar , M.P. Chinnappa , B.N. Mallikarjuna , T.N. Vallinayagam.

Additional Judges: B.S. Sreenivas Rao , G.Patri Basavana Goud , S.R. Venkatesh Murthy S.R. Bannurmath , V. Gopal Gowda .

Registrar General : V.G. Sabahit . Registrar[V] S.K. Venkat Reddy . Registrar [J] . H.G. Ramesh Registrar [A]: C.Shivalingiaha .

…. Not Involved: M.F. Saldhana , Ashok Bhan , , H. Rangavittalachar ,…Advocate General: S. Vijay Shankar ……….

1999 : Chief Justice R.P.Sethi , Ag. CJ Y. Bhaskar Rao , G.C. Bharuka , V.K. Singhal , H.N. Tilhari, A.J.Sadashiva , K.H.N. Khuranga , R.V. Raveendran , V.P. Mohan Kumar, Kumar Rajaratnam, T.S. Thakur, M.B. Vishwanath , C.N. Ashwath Narayan Rao, B.Padmaraj , H.N. Narayan , P.Vishwanath Shetty, A.M. Farooq, Chandrashekaraiah, Chidanad Ullal , H.L. Dattu , B.K. Sanglad, Mohammed Anwar , M.P. Chinnappa , B.N. Mallikarjuna , T.N. Vallinayagam, B.S. Sreenivas Rao , G.Patri Basavana Goud , S.R. Venkatesh Murthy ,

Additional Judges: S.R. Bannurmath , V. Gopal Gowda , K.R. Prasad Rao, N.S. Veerabhdraiah ,

Registrar General : V.G. Sabahit . Registrar[A] Veerabhadraswamy.K Registrar[V] M.S. Rajendra Prasad Registrar [J] . A.C. Kabbin .

…. Not Involved: M.F. Saldhana , Ashok Bhan , H. Rangavittalachar ,…Advocate General: S. Vijay Shankar ……….

2000 : Chief Justice Y. Bhaskar Rao , G.C. Bharuka , V.K. Singhal , H.N. Tilhari, K.H.N. Khuranga , R.V. Raveendran , V.P. Mohan Kumar, Kumar Rajaratnam, T.S. Thakur, B.Padmaraj , H.N. Narayan , P.Vishwanath Shetty, A.M. Farooq, Chandrashekaraiah, Chidanad Ullal , H.L. Dattu , B.K. Sanglad, Mohammed Anwar , M.P. Chinnappa , B.N. Mallikarjuna , T.N. Vallinayagam, G.Patri Basavana Goud , S.R. Venkatesh Murthy , S.R. Bannurmath , V. Gopal Gowda , K.R. Prasad Rao, N.S. Veerabhdraiah , A.V. Srinivasa Reddy .

Additional Judges: R.Gururajan , Manjula Chellur, K. Sreedhar Rao , V.G.Sabahit

Registrar General : A.C. Kabbin . Registrar[A] Veerabhadraswamy.K Registrar[V] A.S.Pachapure Registrar [J]. K.Ramakrishna

…. Not Involved: M.F. Saldhana , Ashok Bhan , , H. Rangavittalachar ,…Advocate General: A.N.Jayram……….

2001-02 : Chief Justice P. Venkataram Reddi , G.C. Bharuka , H.N. Tilhari, K.H.N. Khuranga , R.V. Raveendran , V.P. Mohan Kumar, Kumar Rajaratnam, T.S. Thakur, B.Padmaraj , H.N. Narayan , P.Vishwanath Shetty, A.M. Farooq, Chandrashekaraiah, Chidanad Ullal , H.L. Dattu , B.K. Sanglad, Mohammed Anwar , M.P. Chinnappa , B.N. Mallikarjuna , T.N. Vallinayagam, G.Patri Basavana Goud , S.R. Venkatesh Murthy ,S.R. Bannurmath , V. Gopal Gowda , K.R. Prasad Rao, N.S. Veerabhdraiah , A.V. Srinivasa Reddy , R.Gururajan , Manjula Chellur, K. Sreedhar Rao , V.G.Sabahit , K.L. Manjunath , N.Kumar , N.K.Patil.

…. Not Involved: M.F. Saldhana , Ashok Bhan , H. Rangavittalachar , D.V. Shylendra Kumar,. ……….

51. Wherefore, this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to allow this Application For Transfer of case No. C.C. No. 6711/2012 to Hon’ble Karnataka High Court u/s 407 of Cr. P.C in the interest Justice and Equity.

This Application is drafted and signed by Applicant Accused

Date: 31st July, 2013 Applicant Accused

BANGALORE

[DIGVIJAY MOTE ]
Applicant in Person
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=517766044921815&set=a.517766034921816.121307.100000652710482&type=1&relevant_count=1
https://www.facebook.com/digvijay.mote/media_set?set=a.521545151210571.121921.100000652710482&type=1

20 Sept, 2013:High Court & Judges’ PILs & Contempt On Trial

Contents in this Post:
[1] 20 Sept, 2013 Daily cause List
[2] Last Court Order
[3] Comments
…………………….

[1] 200920131.330WebSite : http://karnatakajudiciary.kar.nic.in IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE ON Friday THE 20TH DAY OF September 2013 AT 02.30 PM BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAM MOHAN REDDY & THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.BILLAPPA COURT HALL NO : 11 LIST NO.2 ********* NICNET Court Hall : 11 Page No : 1 —————————————————————————————————————– Slno Case NO/Year Adv for Pet/Appl/Comp Adv for Resp —————————————————————————————————————– ARGUMENTS ————- 1. CCC 87/2004 ( , ) G SHARADA RAVIVARMA KUMAR K KRISHNA FOR A1 (BY SPECIAL ORDERS) VIJAYA RAGHAVA SARATHY A2 & A3 : DELETED SANDESH CHOUTA K-SHASHI KIRAN SHETTY FOR A4 TO A8 S K VENKATA REDDY FOR A7 G T KUMAR N S HIREMATH VAGDEVI VAGDEVI ASSOCTS- FOR A8 M SHIVAPPA, S K VENKATAREDDY SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY & S ANILKUMAR FOR CONTESTING ACCUSED S M CHANDRASHEKAR FOR A1 Connected With ————– WP 40994/2002 A K BHAT FOR P6, P8, P10 & K KRISHNA FOR R1 PIL P11 TO P14 GOVT ADVOCATE FOR R2 BY SPECIAL ORDERS G PAPI REDDY FOR P1, P3 S G BHAT AND [V/O DTD 25-11-11 P4 & 5 K B S SRINIVAS FOR R3 JUDGMENT RESERVED] P2 Y R JAGADISH DEAD M SHIVAPPA ASSOCIATES FOR R4 A/W IA-VI/13 FOR DIRECTION P7 D N KAGAWAD K V NARASIMHAN FOR R3 2) IA-VII/13 FOR DIRECTION P9 Y C BUJABHALAIAH S P S ASSTS FOR (IA V/13 FILED BY H P RAMANJANEYA M SHIVAPRAKASH HAS BEEN (RETIRED SUB-REGISTRAR) RETURNED WITH OFFICE M/S N R NAIK & ASSTS OBJECTIONS) FOR R5-16 M JAIPRAKASH REDDY FOR R17 WP 13261/2006 CRESTLAW PARTNERS GA FOR R2 & R3 PIL ARUN KUMAR M SIVAPPA & ASSOCIATES BY SPL. ORDERS M V SUNDAR RAMAN FOR R1 WP 7105/2007 CRESTLAW PARTNERS K SHASHIKIRAN SHETTY FOR PIL ARUN KUMAR R1 TO R5 (BY SPL. ORDERS V/O M V SUNDAR RAMAN R6-REGISTRAR CO-OP SOCIETIES, DATED: 08.10.09) BLORE SD A/W MISC.W.2017/10 FOR R7-STATE BY CHIEF SECY SD DIRECTION [WA 4283/95 ORDER SHEET KEPT BELOW] —————————- END ———————————————————————– 200920131.398 WebSite : http://karnatakajudiciary.kar.nic.in ……………………………………………………….

[2] High Court of Karnataka Daily Orders of the Case Number : WP  40994/2002 for the date of order 23/08/2013 Honble Justice RAM MOHAN REDDY & H.BILLAPPA 23/08/2013 Order in WP  40994/200223/08/2013 C.C.C.NO.87/2004 c/w. W.P.NOS.40994/2002, 13261/2006 & 7105/2007. In the order dated 26.4.2013, it is noticed that, one Kempathimmaiah, Sheristhedar of the City Civil Court also an ex-office bearer of the fourth respondent  Society, while as a Director, secured allotment of site measuring 40 feet x 50 feet (should be read as 40 feet x 60 feet) in favour of his wife Smt.Ranjini (to be read as Rajini though in the sale deed dated 13th July 1998, it is mentioned as Smt.Rajani, an associate member of the society. In compliance with the order dated 26.4.2013, that Kempathimmaiah has filed an affidavit along with three documents as enclosures, admitting the fact of allotment of a site in favour of his wife and the subsequent conveyance of the said site under the registered sale deed way back in the year 1998 for a valuable consideration and that the wife of the deponent is willing to deposit the sale consideration and if permitted, minus Rs.61,598/- paid to the society. Learned Senior Counsel for the deponent submits that the affidavit be accepted and directions be issued as regards the deposit of the sale consideration. In the circumstances, we think it appropriate to defer orders on the request made in the said affidavit. Sri.Subramanya Jois, learned Senior Counsel files a memo dated 23.8.2013 indicating that the Society has always been ready and willing to hand over the sites as indicated in the earlier memo dated 5.4.2013, which includes sites indicated in Block Nos.1 to 7 in the map annexed thereto. However, due to certain difficulties faced in the form of litigation pending before court and also interim orders of injunction operating, learned senior counsel submits, on instructions from the President, who is present before court, that such of those sites, which are not subject to litigation and are freehold, would be handed over to the B.B.M.P. by making out a list at the first instance and furnishing the same to the learned Counsel for the B.B.M.P. and thereafterwards complete and conclude the process of delivery of possession by execution of necessary instruments of release-cum-relinquishment. As regards the properties over which disputes are pending, learned Senior Counsel submits that a list would be prepared and made available to the court furnishing all material particulars. We think it appropriate to relist these petitions on 20th September 2013.

[3] Comments

11 of 15 senior most SC judges to retire in 2014

Dhananjay Mahapatra, TNN | Sep 18, 2013, 03.57 AM IST

NEW DELHI: In the next 12 months, theSupreme Court is set to experience a drastic change in composition as 11 of the 15 senior-most judges, including Chief Justice of India P Sathasivam and his successor R M Lodha, will retire.

The chain of retirements will be set in motion by Justice G S Singhvi, who will say goodbye to the highest court on December 11, a date which ironically reads 11-12-13. Many corporate houses would be eagerly waiting for the day as scrupulous monitoring of the CBI probe into the 2G spectrum scam by a bench headed by Justice Singhvi has resulted in many big players facing the rigour of prosecution.

CJI Sathasivam will retire on April 26 next year and his successor Justice Lodha will superannuate five months later. Justice Lodha will be succeeded by Justice H L Dattu, and the country will see three chief justices in 2014.

The court will also see its two women judges – Justices Gyan Sudha Misra and Ranjana P Desai – retire next year. Justice Misra will superannuate on April 27 while Justice Desai will retire on October 29.

Unless the collegium headed by the CJI recommends appointment of awoman judge prior to their retirement, the court will have no female representation, an situation which it is used to in its over 60-years existence.

The retirements of judges after Justice Singhvi will be in this order – Justice H L Gokhale (March 9), Justice Sathasivam (April 26), Justice Misra (April 27), Justice K S Radhakrishnan (May 14), Justice A K Patnaik (June 2), Justice S S Nijjar (June 6), Justice B S Chauhan (July 1), Justice C K Prasad (July 14), Justice Lodha (September 27) and Justice Desai (October 29).

Such a large number of retirements has put a huge responsibility on the collegium headed by CJI Sathasivam which comprises Justices Singhvi, Lodha, Dattu and Chauhan for speedy filling of the vacancies by recommending names much before the posts fall vacant.

The Supreme Court, which has a sanctioned strength of 31 judges including the CJI, is functioning with 28 judges. With the retirement of 11 judges in a year, nearly half the judges by next year would have less than one year experience in the highest court.

With pendency in the apex court steadily rising and threatening to touch 70,000, the CJI in consultation with his colleagues needs to devise an urgent mechanism for speedy disposal of cases, which would need speedy filling of vacancies too.

dhananjay.mahapatra@timesgroup.com

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/11-of-15-seniormost-SC-judges-to-retire-in-a-year/articleshow/22674140.cms?

Cell Numbers Of Hon’ble Judges Of Karantaka High Court as in 2010; as marked in Hand Writing in HC Tel Directory

Chief Justice and Honble Judges

Justice P.D.Dinakaran = 94496 95555
Justice V. Gopalagowda = 94482 89011
Justice Manjula Chellur. = 94482 89015
Justice Sreedhar Rao = 94482 89016
Justice Sabhahit = 94482 89017
Justice K.L.Manjunath = 94482 89018
N.Kumar = 94482 89019
D.V. Shylendra Kumar = 94482 89020
N.K. Patil = 94482 89021
K. Ramanna = 94482 89022
K.Bhathavatsala = 94482 89024
Ajit J. Gunjal = 94482 89026
Mohan Shanthanagoudar = 94482 89027
H.G. Ramesh = 94482 89028
S. Abdul Nazeer = 94482 89029
Ram Mohan Reddy = 94482 89030
H. Billappa = 94482 89031
H.V.G. Ramesh =94482 89033
H.N. Nagamohan Das = 94482 89001
B.S.Patil = 94482 89002
Anand Byrareddy = 94482 89007
Ashok B. Hinchigeri = 94482 89039
V. Jagannathan = 94482 88640
C.R. Kumaraswamy = 94482 88641
Subhash B. Adi = 94482 89003
A.S. Bopanna = 94482 89006
N. Ananda = 94482 89034
Jawad Rahim = 94482 89025
A.N. Venugopala Gowda = 94482 89004
L.Narayana Swamy = 94482 88654
Arali Nagaraj = 94482 88645
A.S. Pachaapure = 94482 886653
Ravi Malimath = 94482 88648
B.V. Nagarathna = 94482 89032
B. Sreenivasa Gowda = 94482 88650
K.N. Keshavanarayana = 94482 88651
S.N. Sathyanarayana = 94482 88652

Officers Of High Court of Karnataka

R.B. Budihal = 94482 89035
A.P. Murari = 94482 89036
B.A. Patil = 94482 89009
H.P Sandesh = 94482 88649
N.S. Kulkarni = 99160 56264

Protocol Departement

K.S. Rahavendra Rao = 98441 22607
K.H.Chndrappa Gowda = 94482 89008

Asst. Registrar (Protocol) = 94482 89013

T.N. Kanakaraju = 94482 89023
N. Bhimaraju = 94482 88643

Deputry Registrars and Other Officers

Sathyarthy = 97403 19947
B.Balakrissna Kumar = 94484 47480
Albal = 94490 77483

Advocate General Government Of Karnataka

B.V. Acharya = 94483 79540
C.H. Jadhav = 94480 56042

FB 645-B: “Karnataka High Court ‘Lords Allows allows SEX by Sitting HC Lord in Chamber!’; ‘Prohibits Lord Ganesha’ “!

“GANESHA PANDALS ON HC PREMISES TRIGGER A ROW” :- Defying an official circular of the High Court that stipulates that no religious idols can be placed inside the court premises, two associations have set up Ganesh pandals.

The two pandals were set up within the premises of the High Court — one in the office of the Karnataka State Advocates Clerks’ Association and the other inside the Advocates’ Conference Hall near Court Hall no. 1.

The pandal inside the Advocates’ Conference Hall is equipped with loudspeakers.

The installation of the two idols inside the court premises are against an order issued by the Registrar-General of the High Court R.B. Budihal on July 1, 2009. The order states: “No idol of any deity and no statue of any personality shall be installed nor any temple, mosque, prayer hall or monument representing any particular religion shall be established within the Principal Bench of the High Court of Karnataka, High Court Circuit Benches at Dharwad and Gulbarga or in any premises of the subordinate courts in the State, including the premises of the Advocates Associations/Bar Associations in order to upkeep the independence and secular status of the judiciary.”

Mr. Budihal’s office conveyed to The Hindu that he doesn’t speak to journalists as a matter of principle. However, his office confirmed that the order was indeed issued by him and continues to be in force.

Advocates Association Bangalore (AAB) president K.N. Subba Reddy defended the setting up of the pandals, saying “Ganesh is a universal god. People of all faiths pray to him. Ganesh puja is being organised with the help of the AAB. It has been going on for more than 20 years. What is wrong?.”

Lawyers, who do not subscribe to the practice of promoting religious activities within court premises, point out that offices in most courts in the State have religious photographs and little shrines within them. One lawyer, who did not wish to be named, referred to the second part of Mr. Budihal’s order, which states: “Except the portrait of the Father of the Nation – Mahatma Gandhi, no other photograph/portrait shall be exhibited…”

Advocate-General Ravivarma Kumar has taken exception to the two Ganesh pandals inside the court. In a dictated statement, he said: “I am against utilising any public property for religious ends. It [the act of keeping Ganesha statues] is not sponsored by the High Court of Karnataka. It is a mystery how the High Court premises has been lent for a private religious purpose. ”

MORE IN: NATIONAL | Today’s Paper
………… reported in The Hindu, Bangalore date-lined Sept 13,2013 front page. Reported by Sudipto Mandal. Bangalore. ….

……“Allows allows SEX by Sitting HC Lord in Chamber!”……..Justice Arali Nagaraj was found in a compromising position with a female court member six months ago; Chief Justice Khehar sought his resignation after committee of judges conducted probe

In what will go down in the history of the higher judiciary as the most brazen act of sexual misconduct by a sitting judge, a Karnataka High Court judge was forced to resign last week following a complaint after he was found in a compromising position with a female member of his staff six months ago.

Top state government sources confirmed that Justice Arali Nagaraj was asked by Chief Justice J S Khehar to put in his papers on Tuesday after a three-member committee of senior judges found the complaint to be true.

While Nagaraj resigned on the grounds of ‘moral turpitude’, the HC administration is in the process of sending a detailed report to the authority concerned.

The allegation levelled against the judge was serious, which was later enquired and proved by the panel.

Nagaraj was found in a compromising position with a woman staffer in a chamber at the Dharwad Circuit Bench court complex.

News of the judge’s romp somehow leaked and was brought to the notice of Khehar, who had the matter probed and then sought Nagaraj’s resignation.

The judge’s act inside his chamber in the HC led to a complaint of explosive nature being filed almost six months ago and sealed Nagaraj’s fate and left the state’s judicial fraternity shocked.

It is learnt that after the unsavoury incident, the lady was promptly transferred out to Gulbarga Circuit Bench.

However, the weight and nature of the evidence before the Chief Justice was overwhelming enough for him to come to the conclusion that Nagaraj had committed sexual misconduct and that he should therefore resign.

It was found prudent that instead of formally slapping charges of sexual misconduct and misdemeanour on Nagaraj, he should be asked to make a quiet exit.

Nagaraj’s resignation comes in the wake of a slew of cases involving judges of the high judiciary, who have found themselves on the wrong side of the law.

Former Karnataka High Court Chief Justice P D Dinakaran resigned as CJ of the Sikkim High Court inJuly on charges of corruption and high misdemeanour.

Making history
However, Nagaraj’s case is the first of its kind in history of the Indian judiciary, which led to a sitting judge being forced to quit on charges of sexual dalliance with a lady staff member.

When contacted, Karnataka High Court Registrar Somashekhar refused to comment. Meanwhile his personal assistant said, “We do not know anything and I will not talk to the media.”

Sources confirmed that it is because of the tawdry nature of the complaint against Nagaraj that the issue is being kept a closely guarded secret.

MiD DAY tried to contact Nagaraj at his residence and spoke to his family members, who said that he had gone out of station.

On the way up
Born in 1951, Nagaraj was appointed as additional judge in the Karnataka High Court on July 4, 2007 and became a permanent judge on July 3, 2009.

In February 1993, he was directly recruited as a district and sessions judge and served in Belgaum, Mangalore, Bijapur and Bangalore.

He has also served as member secretary to the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority and director of the Karnataka Judicial Academy

…………………..
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=503986659633087&set=vb.100000652710482&type=3
http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/ganesh-pandals-on-hc-premises-trigger-a-row/article5122379.ece
By: Imran Gowhar Date: 2011-09-29 Place: Bangalore City Police
http://www.mid-day.com/news/2011/sep/290911-Sitting-HC-judge-quits-over-sexual-misconduct.htm#.UjKfPeRNuLY.twitter

Karnataka High Court “Prohibits Lord Ganesha ; allows SEX by Sitting HC judge in Chamber!”

Justice Arali Nagaraj was found in a compromising position with a female court member six months ago; Chief Justice Khehar sought his resignation after committee of judges conducted probe

In what will go down in the history of the higher judiciary as the most brazen act of sexual misconduct by a sitting judge, a Karnataka High Court judge was forced to resign last week following a complaint after he was found in a compromising position with a female member of his staff six months ago.

Top state government sources confirmed that Justice Arali Nagaraj was asked by Chief Justice J S Khehar to put in his papers on Tuesday after a three-member committee of senior judges found the complaint to be true.

While Nagaraj resigned on the grounds of ‘moral turpitude’, the HC administration is in the process of sending a detailed report to the authority concerned.

The allegation levelled against the judge was serious, which was later enquired and proved by the panel.

Nagaraj was found in a compromising position with a woman staffer in a chamber at the Dharwad Circuit Bench court complex.

News of the judge’s romp somehow leaked and was brought to the notice of Khehar, who had the matter probed and then sought Nagaraj’s resignation.

The judge’s act inside his chamber in the HC led to a complaint of explosive nature being filed almost six months ago and sealed Nagaraj’s fate and left the state’s judicial fraternity shocked.

It is learnt that after the unsavoury incident, the lady was promptly transferred out to Gulbarga Circuit Bench.

However, the weight and nature of the evidence before the Chief Justice was overwhelming enough for him to come to the conclusion that Nagaraj had committed sexual misconduct and that he should therefore resign.

It was found prudent that instead of formally slapping charges of sexual misconduct and misdemeanour on Nagaraj, he should be asked to make a quiet exit.

Nagaraj’s resignation comes in the wake of a slew of cases involving judges of the high judiciary, who have found themselves on the wrong side of the law.

Former Karnataka High Court Chief Justice P D Dinakaran resigned as CJ of the Sikkim High Court inJuly on charges of corruption and high misdemeanour.

Making history
However, Nagaraj’s case is the first of its kind in history of the Indian judiciary, which led to a sitting judge being forced to quit on charges of sexual dalliance with a lady staff member.

When contacted, Karnataka High Court Registrar Somashekhar refused to comment. Meanwhile his personal assistant said, “We do not know anything and I will not talk to the media.”

Sources confirmed that it is because of the tawdry nature of the complaint against Nagaraj that the issue is being kept a closely guarded secret.

MiD DAY tried to contact Nagaraj at his residence and spoke to his family members, who said that he had gone out of station.

On the way up
Born in 1951, Nagaraj was appointed as additional judge in the Karnataka High Court on July 4, 2007 and became a permanent judge on July 3, 2009.

In February 1993, he was directly recruited as a district and sessions judge and served in Belgaum, Mangalore, Bijapur and Bangalore.

He has also served as member secretary to the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority and director of the Karnataka Judicial Academy

…………………..
By: Imran Gowhar Date: 2011-09-29 Place: Bangalore

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=516383675060052&set=vb.100000652710482&type=3

http://www.mid-day.com/news/2011/sep/290911-Sitting-HC-judge-quits-over-sexual-misconduct.htm#.UjKfPeRNuLY.twitter

Karnataka Judge’s Wife’s SUICIDE BID & Cover-up by Police & Judiciary

Bangalore: A magistrate’s wife tried to end her life by hanging herself at their house in National Games Village Complex (NGV) in Koramangala late Wednesday evening. Her mother-in-law and a neighbour, who is also a judge, rushed her to Manipal Hospital where her condition is said to be critical.

However, there seems to be more to the case than meets the eye. The NGV Complex (which has quarters for judges) is abuzz with rumours that a cover-up attempt is in the works. The hospital claims that they have reported the matter to the police. However, the police say they have received no intimation yet, at the time of going to press at 9.30 pm.

Confirming the suicide attempt, an official from Adugodi police, in whose jurisdiction NGV Complex is situated, said, “Yes, it is true. We got a call around 10 pm on Wednesday from a resident of NGV Club (who is a neighbour of the magistrate) stating a woman had made a suicide bid in a neighbouring house.” The official said following urgent summons from the caller, they were at the spot within five minutes. He said they later shifted the woman, who had tried to hang herself, to Manipal Hospital. “We don’t know what happened later. It is the duty of Manipal Hospital to take up a medico-legal case and inform the police in whose jurisdiction the hospital is located. They, in turn, will inform us. After that we will begin investigation,” he said.

When contacted, Manipal Hospital authorities admitted that a middle-aged woman, identified as Asha, with bruise marks around her neck was being treated at the hospital. “It is our standard operating practice that we send a report to the police when the patient regains consciousness and can talk. Moreover, the consent of the patient is also required. Beyond this, we can not divulge any details,” an official said. The official added they get a large number of medico-legal cases and the cops are informed “in due course of time.”

An hour after making this statement, a representative from Manipal Hospital called Bangalore Mirror again and said, “We have sent an intimation to the police and we have written proof.”

However, Airport (Old) police, in whose limits the hospital is located, refuted the claim. “As per procedure, the hospital is duty-bound to begin treatment of the patient coming to them with injuries which are suspicious in nature. They then take up a medico-legal case and inform the jurisdictional police as soon as possible. They need not wait for the consent of the patient or her relatives. Once the police are intimated, they will take a call on further action,” an official said, adding, “In this case, more than 24 hours have passed, but no report has come to us from the hospital.”

The police denied receiving any report from the hospital.

An Adugodi police official said, “We will take up the case if the hospital sends us a report through the Airport police. Till then, there’s not much we can do. Officially, we have not heard anything from the victim’s family or the hospital yet.”

………….  Sep 13, 2013, 01.00 AM IST

By: Manjunath Chandra & Vandana Kamath

http://www.bangaloremirror.com/bangalore/crime/Suicide-bid-by-judges-wife-its-cover-up/articleshow/22524059.cms

A. 386: Judicial EmpHBCS. Attached Three Files of Scanned documents

00] Digvijay Mote, Justice Investigator. Editor www.judgesplot4plot.com  &  www.indiancorruptjudges.com .Brief of Investigations done and reported by Accused Applicant.
02] “Conflict of Interest, Bias and Cumulative Bias”. Necessity of the Transfer this C.C. No 6711/2012 to High Court. Provisions of Law and Facts.
03]  Brief of Complainant, Complaint, F.I.R.
04] Arrest of accused by Vidhna Soudha Police, three days Judicial custody,  search and Seizure.
05]  Whether Accused case could who has
Whether Court must work as Clerks and Push Mass-Corruption in Judiciary brought to Notice of the Hon’ble Court and Persecute the Accused, who has done No Legal Wrongs.
05]
01.00]         Applicant is served with charge sheet  u/s Sec. 341, 504 and 506 of IPC. The I.O of the case has submitted in the Charge Sheet submitted to this Court Pages 52 to 104 which are transcripts from Two websites www.judgesplot4plot.com  &  www.indiancorruptjudges.com . The I.O has also submitted  few pages from my youtube.com  accounts where I have up-loaded Videos; directly or Indirectly connected with contents of my websites and  the affairs of “Karnataka Judicial Department Employees House Building Co-operative Society Limited, Karnataka High Court, Bangalore”.  For brevity here after termed as “Karnataka Employees HBCS”; has Members enrolled about 4,000 plus persons Serving in Karnataka Judicial Department as in 2006 or so. It has come to Applicant’s Notice that at S.L.F. No 3262 of Members’ list is shown as “Shri Patil Nagalinganagouda, Civil Judge & JMFC, II Court, Davangere”. This fact is reflected at page No. 284 of Members list. The relevant  Few of the pages are Annexed as Ann-1.

01.01]    In post Independent India  never any Chief Justice of India had made a speech like our present Chief Justice of India Hon’ble Mr. Kapadia, on 26th November 2011, during his LAW DAY speech. He said  “If any Judge is believed to be Corrupt; that Judge should be named in Public and brought  to the Notice of Chief Justice of High Court”.  It is for the First Time in the history of indian judiciary a sitting Chief Justice Of India asking his country men to raise voice against corruption in Judiciary. ……..    Ann-2.

01.01] As per Applicant’s Investigations about  4,800 plus Persons have enrolled in this Society as in 2007 claiming to be “Employees of Karnataka Judicial Department stating that they are residents of Bangalore for more than five years and they or their spouses, Children, parents do not own any houses etc.,. “. All Members have declared that they are Employees of High Court or Lower Courts or working in Karnataka Judicial Department. Hence hereafter Peon, Court Officer, Registrars, Magistrates, District Judges, Registrars. Registrar Generals of High Court, two sitting and seven retired Judges of  Supreme court. About two Dozen of Judges who have served in various High Courts of India. Three retired Chief Jusices of India. Two Serving Chief Chief Justices of Orissa and Kerala High Courts. Judges, CJs of HCs, CJIs are all Employees, who do not enjoy any Privilege that is available to “Judges who are not Members of this or such Employees Housing Society. All members are equally responsible for Good or Bad done by Management of Society, which is elected by all members, voted or not. Whether Members are allotted with Site or not, in any Crimes committed by Society, it is u/s 34 of I.P.C. If any member is deceased his or her legal representatives are responsible for fruits and crimes.

01.02] Karnataka Employees HBCS has developed Two Layouts viz., JUDICIAL Layout at Yelahanka in 193 Acres and another at Talaghattapura Village on Kanakapura Road. Third one near Bidadi or Ramnagar is consideration by BMRDA, as per Society submission to Kar high court. Sufficient to say that the Karnataka Employees HBCS has committed similar, less or more crimes in other two layouts, which independent Government  Investigating agency such as C.B.I , which three SC & HC judges pray in WP.PIL 7105/2007, shall reveal. Hence JUDICIAL Layout Vs. Karnataka Employees HBCS gist given below.
01.03]  Brief of frauds committed by Karnataka Employees HBCS in JUDICIAL Layout at Yelahanka in 193 Acres:
a] Government had notified 170 Acres of “Futher Extension of Karnataka Housing Board layout, at Yelhanka by 4[1] Notification. This land got Denotified by Karnataka Employees HBCS to get it notified to form JUDICIAL Layout
b] In 1988 Karnataka Employees HBCS signed Agreement with Karnataka Government in accordance with Part-VII of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as amended in 1984, treating the Karnataka Employees HBCS, as Private Company. This Agreement was allowed to be used by Employee-Judges ‘at times to the advantage’ and ‘at times to suppress the same; to consider acuisition is for Public Purpose under Chapter-II of L.A. Act,1894’ by collusion of  Government, High Court and Lower Courts to the detriment of Rule of Law and JUSTICE. Contrary to any respect for Rule of Law, Judgments, honesty, Morality, Integrity worth the Lordship or Judges, poor uneducated farmers’ lands were illegally got acquired.
c] Karnataka Employees HBCS failed to deposit with SLAO  Rs. Rs.2,02,55,734-50 [Ann-… ] in ninety days from the date of signing Agreement.
c] But the similar Agreements signed by Sreenivasa Housing society of Advocates and Charted Accuontants  of Andhra Pradesh was struck down & declared by N. Venkatachala through Supreme Court Order in SRINIVASA CO-OP. HOUSE BUILDING SOCIETY LTD. v. MADAM G. SASTRY, (1994) 4 Supreme Court Cases 675.
c] Karnataka Employees HBCS failed to  pay cost of News Paper publication of 4[1], 6[1] etc., did not pay any Compensation .  Society represented by its Director N. Shivanna appeared as Owners before S.L.A.O and consented to pass Awards and acknowledged for having received Compensation. Hence SLAO passed similar consent Awards for 87 Acres based on Society Directors consenting to Awards, not Land Owners. Seems SLAO paid few lakhs to five land owners after 18-05-93 per Annexure No. ….. Scanned copy pages from register of S.L.A.O is enclosed, so as to identify the persons behind various crimes committed & prosecute them  in  land aqcuistition, Stage-Managed-Land-Acquisition by Karnataka Employees HBCS with express Blessing of Court Orders. No compensation paid to land owners, no PENNY paid to Government towards land Conversion, Government’s expenditure over land aqcuisition and attending litigations.

XX] However SLAO; except High Court Order in 1994 to hand-over 17 Acres 18 Guntas;  did not handed-over the balance139 Acres of lands to  Lands to Karnataka Employees HBCS, though 156 Acres is taken posession, for Society failed to pay Rs. 2.02 Crores. Hence legally Judicial Layout is formed sites, though revenue sites, in only 17 Acres 18 guntas. But Karnataka Employees HBCS, Government have misguided and continue to High Court, its beneficiaries, Members, General Public including Lokayukta that “Society  has formed Sites in 156 Acres and in 37 Acres accrued by private Compromise with Land Lords; and having executed Sale Deeds stating layout is approved B.D.A in 1992 for 156 Acres of Land is Fraud on Constitution of India” and the “Karnataka High Court; its Member-Judges, Judicial Officers .
.XX.] Government, both Political and Executive colluded with Anti-Social activities of Karnataka Employees HBCS. They failed to take-over the lands along with buildings; as Karnataka Employees HBCS violated all terms of Agreement, with Blessings of High Court and Lower Court orders.  Possibly it is done on Quid-pro-quo basis, to have Illegal, unethical, un-holy constitutional relation with Judiciary, Judicial Bodies and Lokayukta, legal officers, Law Secretaries.
.XX] The Directors have Karnataka Employees HBCS have filed Affidavit dated 21 September 2004 in Karnataka High Court in W.P.[PIL] 40994/2002 stating that every law is violated by Grace of Lordships and Judgments. Annexure…. .
c] Karnataka Employees HBCS violated each and every Government, B.D.A, etc.,  with the help of Judgments of Karnataka High Court. Most Judges who gave Judgments are Members of Karnataka Employees HBCS. Judges Names and case numbers:
.XX] 156 Acres’ Land Conversion Fees: WP. No. 2382 of 1990.[Link in website  026.06 ] Justice S. Rajendra Babu;Interim Order [026.08 ] staying Convrsion fees.   Justice Chandrashekariah. Judgement 11th NOV 1996 [026.09]. In W. A. 138 of 1997; R. P. SETHI, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. R. BANNURMATH Judgment dated 25th June, 1997.[ 026.04 Jmnt in WA]. 2007 …..Find-out…..Judgment Karnataka High DB set aside Land conrsion fee need not be paid by Society, but by Site Owners who are Occupiers of land.
b] Karnataka Cabinet Decision not to hand-over lands to Housing Society had directed on 17 January, 1990 to stay L.A. proceedings with immediate effect. Again the Cabinet on 6th August,1993 by Ho’ble Chief Minister Veerappa Moily reads thus: Subject : No. C. 18 – 1993. Role of House Building Co-operative Societies in tackling housing shortage in Bangalore City and other major cities in the State. CABINET DECISION : Cabinet considered the subject at a great length. Since many of the non-genuine housing societies had been given land, it was decided to take the following steps:- (a) Wherever lands have not yet been handed over to the Housing Societies, they should not be handed over, but should be handed over to BDA; for being given to the genuine members of the societies: (b) Wherever lands have already been handed over to the Housing Societies, they should be taken back to Government to be handed over to the Bangalore Development Authority for being given to the genuine members of the Societies: (c) An enquiry should be held as to how orders were issued and lands handed over to societies in contravention of the Cabinet decision. Sd/-.(M. VEERAPPA MOILY). Chief Minister 6-1-1993.
XX] Government / SLAO notified in Gazette u/s 16 of ‘Taking Posession of lands’ for JUDICIAL layout on following dates:
i] Gazette dated   25th June, 1992 ….      …. ..91 Acres 13.25 Guntas
ii] Gazette dated  17th December, 1992 …….. 47 Acres 35.50 Guntas
iii] Gazette dated   13th May, 1993 …….. ………17 Acres 18.00 Guntas
……Total Extent of Lands.. 156 Acres 26.75 Guntas
b]B.D.A Plan Approval: Karnataka Employees HBCS on 6th November,1992 approached B.D.A to approve layout plan in 156 Acres 26 Guntas. B.D.A approves in priniciple, subject to various conditions including to produce ownership of lands, on 16th November, 1992 and B.D.A intimates the same by its letter of 28th November,1992 to Karnataka Employees HBCS.
XXX] Karnataka Employees HBCS files WP No. W.P. Nos. 39338 – 41 / 1992
questioning  the B.D.A Conditions.  Justice stays the B.D.A demands  …….. .
XXX] Karnataka Employees HBCS filed petition WP 1600/1994 in High Court praying to direct SLAO to hand-over 17 Acres 18 Guntas to Society. Petition was listed before Justice G.P. Shivaprakash. On 3rd July 1989 SLAO had directed the Karnataka Employees HBCS to deposit Balance amount of Rs. 65 Lakhs, towards cost of acquisition.  On 10th February,1994 Justice G.P. Shivaprakash directed the SLAO to hand-over 17 acres 18 guntas to Karnataka Employees HBCS.
Government directed to SLAO on 28 August,1994 to handover 17 acres 18 guntas to Karnataka Employees HBCS. Hence  SLAO handed-over 17 acres 18 guntas to Karnataka Employees HBCS on 2nd September,1994.

Karnataka Employees HBCS files petition in 1994 vide WP No.
XXX] Karnataka Government directs on 11-05-1994 to  Inspector General of Registrar, Bangalore’s all sub-registrars not to Register any sale deeds presented by 32 Housing Socities of Bangalore, until and unless Societies get ‘No Objection Certificates from both Deaprtments of Co-operation and B.D.A’ to register site.
XXX]
xxx] On request of Karnataka Employees HBCS, Justice R.V. Raveendran on 13th November 1996 allows the Societies to withdraw the petitions  W.P. Nos. 39338 – 41 / 1992 by High Court Order. Means that Societies agreed to fulfill all conditions put forth by B.D.A. but till date Karnataka Employees HBCS failed to ulfill all conditions put forth by B.D.A; muchless the Ownership of Lands handed-over to Society by Government.

01.03] JUDICIAL Layout at Yelahanka in 193 Acres: Beneficiaries & Conspirators of the Scam: Supreme Court of India : 4 Sitting Judges, 4 CJIs [Retd], 8 Judges [Retd],  Karnataka High Court: 21 Sitting Judges,  47 Chief Justices & Judges [Across India] [Retd] Total: 120 SC & HC Judges. And 747 Judges of  Karnataka Subordinate Judiciary . About 1,000 Plus law Graduates because of which they are appointed as Court Officers, Asst & Deputy Registrars from across Karnataka.
Members. The other Members who might not have been allotted sites here are also equally Responsible for the Crimes committed in and every step of  Karnataka Employees HBCS securing Dozens of judgments from Karnataka Lower Court, High Court and Supreme Court in developing  JUDICIAL Layout at Yelahanka in 193 Acres have committed Crimes punishable under:
[A]  I.P.C. Sec. 34 r/w 120-A & B [Criminal Conspiracy] r/w Chapters IX [ OF OFFENCES BY OR RELATING TO PUBLIC SERVANTS ], X [ OF CONTEMPTS OF THE LAWFUL AUTHORITY OF PUBLIC SERVANTS ], XI [ OF FALSE EVIDENCE AND OFFENCES AGAINST PUBLIC JUSTICE ],
XIV [ OF OFFENCES AFFECTING THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, CONVENIENCE, DECENCY AND MORALS ], XVI [ OF OFFENCES AFFECTING THE HUMAN BODY  ], XVII [ OF OFFENCES AGAINST PROPERTY  ], XVIII [ OF OFFENCES RELATING TO DOCUMENTS AND TO PROPERTY MARKS ] ,
XIX [ OF THE CRIMINAL BREACH OF CONTRACTS OF SERVICE ] .
[B] Karnataka Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggrs, Goondas, Immoral, Slum Grabbers, Act, 1985 .
[C]  Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988
[D] The Contempt of Court Act, 1971 .

01.04]      Applicant Accused, owner  of said websites, is working in close Co-operation in Government and Private Sector  with nationalistic organizations like  www.judicialreforms.org , http://pucl.org/ , http://lokpal-hindi.blogspot.in/ ,  Samaj Parivartana Samudaya , http://www.indiaagainstcorruption.org/index1.html , http://www.aidprojects.org , http://www.transparency.org/ and such other agencies like N.G.O.s, Media, Advocates and public spirited men with patriotism. Applicant  addressing the burning issues ofc in India in high Places of Governance so as to reduce, if not to eliminate CORRUPTION and see that India stands with her head held high . We also keep informing the latest information to Governmental Law Enforcing Agencies since 2003 like cbi.nic.in  , cvc.nic.in ,, of late with  ksp.gov.nic.in , other State & Central Law Enforcing Authorities  Enforcement Directorate etc.,

01.04]  Applicants’ websites deal with Rampant Corruption in Judiciary, with Facts and Figures. It is to see that Corruption is reduced in Indian Judiciary. And the Transparency, Impartiality, Judicial Integrity, Judicial Accountability, Impartial Trial of Cases etc., is enforced; which is Cry of United Nations Convention Against Corruption, signed by India in 2005 and Ratified in 2010, news paper Report.   Ann-3.

01.04] “Karnataka Employees HBCS” Versus Judges in the Garb of Upa-Lokayukta & Lokayukta; abused their Offices with Corrupt Motives . Since Twenty years “searching Layout Plan & Lands; by My Lords”
[a]  Upa Lokayukta G.P. Shivaprakash suo moto commenced investigations vide Complaint No. Compt//UpLok/BCD/64/1999 on 4/12/1999 against “SHIVALINGAIAH, PRESIDENT, KAR.STATE JUDL. DEPT.EMP.HOUSE BLGD.CO-OP.SOCIETY, BANGALORE” under heading “IRREGULARITIES, NEPOTISM AND CORRUPT ACTIVITIES IN ALLOT- MENT OF SITES”.
[b] Up-Lokayukta wrote letter on 6th September, 1999 to B.D.A asking “whether JUDICIAL Layout is Approved by B.D.A and whether B.D.A has handed over Layout to C.M.C, Yelahanka”. As per our Investigations B.D.A replied to Up Lokayukta’s letter on 8th October, 1999 stating “ Neither B.D.A has approved JUDICIAL Layout Plan nor B.D.A has passed any Order to Hand-over JUDICIAL Layout to  C.M.C, Yelahanka”.
[c] After retirement of G.P. Shivaprakash, Justice N. Venkatachala was appointed as Karnataka Lokayukta. He instead of passing Orders as per Lokayukta Act or Handing over Investigations to C.B.I chose to close the case on 13th March, 2002 . It may kindly be noted that both G.P. Shivaprakash and Justice N. Venkatachala Karnataka Lokayukta were and are Allottees of sites in JUDICIAL Layout .
[d] Websites Investigation are trying to bring to the kind perusal the True Facts to the attention of Supreme Court of India, Union Home Ministry, Karnataka Governement, Legislature,  B.D.A, Karnataka High Court, Media, Trasparency International, C.B.I, Karnataka Police, Advocates, whole world. To see that respect of Public to the Hon’ble Judges who are not party, Members to the ‘Cess Pool of Scam’, is not Shaken.
[e] Justice N. Venkatachala who closed the case on 13th March, 2002, was allotted with three sites on his family members names. This Hush-up is haunting Karnataka High Court since 2002 till date in Writ Petitions P.I.L 40994/2002 & 7105/2007 & 13261/2006. The facts in Petitions is this that Up-Lokayukta was investigating whether Karnataka Employees HBCS which has secured more than few dozen Judgments from Karnataka High Court and Lower Courts till are bonafide or by Fraud. Few of prominent  Judgments are ILR 1994 KAR 2115, ILR 1995 KAR 3139, etc. Up-Lokayukta G.P.Shivaparakash and Lokayukta came to know through Invesigations with B.D.A and other Departments that Judgments were “Given and Taken by Fraud, Collusion, with Corrupt motives etc.” and that no any allottee has any Legal Title of Ownership to their respective sites, in the Light of B.D.A’s reply to Up-lokayukta
[f] The facts which came to be determined by Lokayukta and High Court etc., are being raised again in High Court by Justice K.Jagannath Shetty, Up-Lokayukta G.P. Shivaprakash, Justice M.P. Chinnappa, Justice A.M. Farooq and Justice T.N. Vallinayagam, the Judges of Supreme Court, Karnataka High Court. Which facts are honestly reported in our websites. In WP 7105/2007 Up-Lokayukta G.P. Shivaprakash seek C.B.I Investigations in La-de-affairs of “Karnataka Employees HBCS” stating thus at:
Paragraph 30 [A]: “ It is Disgraceful that this Judicial Layout is mired in controversy and has become cesspool of Scandals. It has become Talk of The Town. An unknown source has created website www.judgesplot4plot.com derogatory to the position of Judges. It is submitted that there are too many skeletons in the closet and the management has no Sense of Duty or Shame and requires to be replaced. A thorough time bound inquiry by an independentant investigating agency of all the misdeeds including allotment of sites, convertion of civil amenity sites and beneficiaries of the society is essential.
Paragraph 30 [B]: Petitioners being retired Judges of Karnataka High Court are confronted by public with Questions for which they have no answers. The question normally asked if JUDICIAL Layout is Above Law
[g] The several judgments secured by “Karnataka Employees HBCS” state Land is acquired legally, compensation is paid to land lords legally by S.L.A.O,  Judicial Layout is approved by Bangalore Development Authority. Civic Amenity sites of about 90 Acres is handed over to B.D.A, Sites are registered to bonafide Employees etc.,. And accordingly 2,400 plus sites are registered stating in each & every Sale Deed that Bangalore Development Authority has approved layout plan in 1992 .
[h] Up-Lokayukta came to know that Judgments were secured by Fraud and contrary to facts. Based on such Judgments 1,200 plus Judges from Superior Courts to Lower Courts, Judicial Officers were registered with sale deeds of  sites stating layout is approved by B.D.A. Similarly 1,200 sites to Court peons, clerks, etc.,It also came to know that Layout is formed in Revenue Lands in 193 Acres, Land Grabbing of 37 Acres, no compensation is paid to land lords etc.,. Lokayukta failed to punish the Karnataka Employees HBCS and passed illegal Order of closure of Investigations, whereby it encouraged Corruption and made Contempt of Court, Land Grabbing, Fraud, Forgery, Cheating etc as legitimate; whereby Legislature Committee in 2007 estimates quantified 45,000 acres of Government Lands in Bangalore Urban is Grabbed and in many cases with Fraud Judgments etc., is one of contention and purpose of websites.
[i] It however may be noted that Karnataka High Court Justice G.P. Shivaprakash gave two judgments in favour of Karnataka Employees HBCS viz., W.P. 1600/1994 directing Government to hand-over 17 acres of land in 1994.
Then in W.P. 18447/1994 in 1994; striking down Karnataka Governemt direction to Sub-registrars “not to Register the Sites of Bangalore’s 32 House Building co-operative Societies including Karnataka Employees HBCS”. Judgment is reported as ILR 1994 KAR 2115. This Judgment based on Karnataka Employees HBCS registered 2,400 plus sites stating layout is approved by B.D.A including 320 Sites formed in un-acquired 33 Acres of lands, without ownership, convertion, B.D.A approval etc.,. Based on same Judgment several H.B.C.S also registered sites similarly.

5. Few Articles appeared in Kannada weekly “AGNI” continuously of the Applicants Investigations of large Scale corruption Indian Judiciary:
[a]  in Part One April 28, 2005, Headlines read thus: “JUDICIAL Layout: JUDGES’ ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES”, “Whence Judges Themselves Kept JUSTICE on aUCTION”.
[b] Cover page of  Part Two on May 5, 2005 Mr. Lokayukta: Why there is No RAID in JUDICIAL Layout?” and
[c] . Part Three on May 19, 2005 Issue “Judicial Layout: Clever is the One who has Food in the Marriage of Mental Lady” etc.
are Annexed as Ann-  ….  This continuous News for three weeks caught Men-in-Power by Awe, arose a kind of Surprise in the Karnataka Legislators, Police, and other Officials in Secretariat and across State. Many of them contacted and got records from Applicant. Most others purchased CDs from Gangaram Book Stores, M.G. Road, Bangalore.
5.      The contents in Applicant’s websites and AGNI News, lead to “Karnataka Legislative Assembly Debates on 27th July,2005.  The Debate is Annexed as   Ann- . . . .

6.     The Karnataka Assembly which has accepted the Interim Report Part-2 of  “Karnataka Legislature Joint House Committee on ‘Encroachment of Government Lands in Bangalore City / Urban District’ Committee observed thus:
[A] at page 07 “Of the long list of erring HBCSs, the most notorious is the “Judicial Employees HBCS. Instead of being model for other HBCSs, this Society has Created an all-India record for being a Mother of Illegalities, unleashing tsunami of scandals”.
[B] At page 12 of Report under Heading “Criminal Prosecution of Land Grabbers, Government Officials and Non-Officials who actively promote, abet and assist Land Grabbing”: The Duty of the Administration is to uphold rule of law. The purpose of the Fence is to protect the Crops; to act as Guardian, Trustee and a Sentinel. But the few examples in the above paragraphs show that Fence itself is eating the Crops, the Guardian himself is molesting the ward, the Trustee is Robbing the Beneficiary and the sentinel is Looting the Citizens. If these Illegal, anti-social and unethical acts go unpunished, honest citizens will loose all faith in Government and the very Social Contract on which the State is founded will crumble as castles on foundation of sand.
[C]  At pages 14-18 of the Report: STRANGE CASE OF KARNATAKA JUDICIAL EMPLOYEES HOUSE BUILDING SOCIETY – WHO WILL GUARD THE GUARDIANS ?     …Gist is;
[i]             It is therefore clear that the     Judicial Employees HBCS.has violated the land Reforms Act and the land so held by the HBCS shall be forfeited to the Government along with structures on it. The HBCS gave an ingenious explanation to the Committee on 30 May 2007 that the lands through private negotiations were actually not purchased through Sale Deeds but only Agreements to Sale were effected and HBCS has taken possession of the lands on that basis.  In some cases, and few land-holders have entered into a “Compromise” before the City Civil Judge. It is astounding as to how such “Compromise” in violation of the provisions of the Land Reforms Act and that too before a Court of Law can be entered.
[ii]     The HBCS submitted a layout plan to the Bangalore Development Authority 6-11-1992 for approval. The BDA vide its letter dated 28-11-1992 resolved to approve the layout subject to certain conditions. However the HBCS never again went before the BDA.
[iii]        The Judicial Employees HBCS then submitted its layout     to the City Municipal Council, Yelahanka which is not a planning Authority for the lands of the HBCS as the BDA is the concerned authority under the Town and Country Planning Act. The CMC gave approval    primarily for collection of fees at Rs. 9 per square foot. This was assumed to be “approval” of the layout for which CMC had no jurisdiction.
[iv]      The  Judicial Employees HBCS enrolled 3399 members and 1353 Associate Members and allotted 2268 sites. This included large numer of Associate Members including Judges of High Court / Supreme Court their family members, Politicians, Contractors, Officials like Police Inspectors who can not be even ‘honorary’ Judicial Officers.
[v]      In October 2002 the Judicial Employees Welfare Association petitioned to the High Court about various violations committed by the HBCS and the HC by an Interim Order directed trhat no sites reserved for civic amenities and parks and public use should be distributed as sites by the HBCS. However the HBCS violated this direction also and distributed sites reserved for public use. Against this a contempt petition was filed by the Welfare Association which is being heard by the High Court of Karnataka ……..
[vi]

U.N. Secretary General Letter On Rule Of Law. 9th May 2012

World Bank Group President Robert B. Zoellick Remarks for International Corruption Hunters Alliance December 7, 2010

Judicial Integrity Group Documents

1] Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct (ECOSOC 2006/23): Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct (Engl.) pdf

2] Commentary on the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct:Commentary on the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct (Engl.) pdf

3]  Measures for the Effective Implementation of the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct
Measures for the Effective Implementation of the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct (Engl.) pdf
4]  Dissemination Measures : Dissemination Measures (Engl.) pdf
5]  Principles of Conduct for Court Personnel: Principles of Conduct for Court Personnel (Engl.) pdf
6]  Reports of JIG Meetings (all documents are in English)
a] Report of the First Meeting, Vienna, 2000 pdf
b] Report of the Second Meeting, Bangalore, 2001 pdf
c]  Report of Round-Table Meeting, The Hague, 2002 pdf
d] Report of the Third Meeting, Colombo, 2003 pdf
e] Report of the Fourth Meeting, Vienna, 2005 pdf
f] Report of the Fifth Meeting, Vienna, 2007 pdf
g] Report of the Sixth Meeting, Lusaka, 2010 pdf
Pictures of the Meetings can be found here

History of the Group
History of the Group 2000-2011 (Engl.) pdf

3 attachments — Download all attachments

Members.3280.Pages 184.pdf 5456K   View   Download

SaleDeeds. 2260.AsOf 2003.55 Pages.pdf 1513K   View   Download

37Acres.320Sites.6 Pages.pdf 225K   View   Download