HC quashes govt order on Mysore Lamps closure

Last Updated 14 January 2011, 18:08 IST

Hearing a batch of petitions filed by employees of Mysore Lamps Works Limited and SC/ST Employees Union, Justice N Kumar gave petitioners the liberty to approach the company court to challenge the Appellate Authority for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (AAIFR) and Board of Industries and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR)  recommendations to close down the company.

The state government on January 4, 2002 and August 30, 2002 issued orders for the closure of operations following the recommendations of AAIFR and BIFR.

The Court observed that the company court was better suited to go into the legality of the orders passed by AIFR and BIFR, and also to find out whether the company could be revived or any other scheme could be accepted.

The court has further observed that the petitioners are entitled to get financial relief from the state government. At the time of the matter being referred to High Court for liquidation, the company had 1350 employees.

BJP chief whip memo

The High Court dismissed a memo filed by BJP chief whip Jeevaraj, seeking adjournment of the hearing of five independent MLAs who have challenged the disqualification order of the Speaker.

Jeevaraj had sought a ten-day adjournment for the hearing of petition by the independent MLAs as the special leave petition of the 11 BJP MLAs is also posted around the same time and it would pose a problem for the senior counsel to appear before the High Court.

The independent MLAs petition is scheduled for hearing on January 17, while the special leave petition is scheduled for hearing on January 19.

FIR stayed

The High Court granted a four week stay on the FIR lodged by Anjula Jackson, a US based Nithyananda devotee against Lenin Karuppan. Anjula had lodged a complaint with Ramanagara police which was later referred to the Bidadi police station.

Lenin had approached the High Court challenging the FIR registered by the police.
In her complaint Anjula Jackson has stated that Lenin had violated Nithyananda’s privacy, trespassed Nithyananda’s living quarters and defamed him.

(Published 14 January 2011, 18:08 IST)

Follow us on