<p>Bengaluru, DHNS: The <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/karnataka-high-court">Karnataka high court</a> has dismissed a writ appeal filed by M Basavaraja Naik, former MLA from Mayakonda constituency, challenging his removal from the post of chairperson of Central Relief Committee. </p><p>A division bench comprising Chief Justice NV Anjaria and KV Aravind pointed out that the state government was within its right to withdraw the nomination or cancel the appointment of a nominated member before three years.</p><p>Basavaraja Naik was nominated to the post on July 26, 2022 by the then BJP government. The new Congress government withdrew the nomination with effect from May 23, 2023.</p>.Karnataka HC stays investigation, court proceedings against Infosys co-founder Kris Gopalakrishnan.<p>He had moved the division bench after the single bench dismissed his petition. He contended that as per section 4 (3) of the Karnataka Prohibition of Beggary Act, the term of office of the non-official members is three years and hence his removal is premature as well as a politically guided action. </p><p>On the other hand, the state government submitted that the very provision relied upon by Basavaraja states that the nomination is subject to the pleasure of the government.</p><p>The division bench pointed out that section 4 (3) unequivocally incorporates the doctrine of pleasure. It says that the term of the office of the non-official member shall be for a period of three years, but subject to the pleasure of the state government, the court said. </p><p>“The Doctrine of Pleasure when to be applied and invoked in relation to a person nominated to any Board or statutory body when his or her nomination is subjected to the Doctrine of Pleasure of the Government, there will be a little room to contend that nominee member is not permitted to complete the regular total period of the tenure of nomination,” the bench said.</p>.Karnataka High Court refuses to cancel H D Revanna's bail, grants bail to co-accused in abduction case.<p>The court further said, “Though the nomination can be viewed as a mode of appointment and it could be loosely used as a substitute for appointment, the nomination to the Committee under Section 4(2) of the Act read with Section 3 of the Act, has its own connotation and import to divest the petitioner of any exercisable right and entitled the State Government to prematurely cancel the status of the nominee petitioner under the doctrine of pleasure.”</p>
<p>Bengaluru, DHNS: The <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/karnataka-high-court">Karnataka high court</a> has dismissed a writ appeal filed by M Basavaraja Naik, former MLA from Mayakonda constituency, challenging his removal from the post of chairperson of Central Relief Committee. </p><p>A division bench comprising Chief Justice NV Anjaria and KV Aravind pointed out that the state government was within its right to withdraw the nomination or cancel the appointment of a nominated member before three years.</p><p>Basavaraja Naik was nominated to the post on July 26, 2022 by the then BJP government. The new Congress government withdrew the nomination with effect from May 23, 2023.</p>.Karnataka HC stays investigation, court proceedings against Infosys co-founder Kris Gopalakrishnan.<p>He had moved the division bench after the single bench dismissed his petition. He contended that as per section 4 (3) of the Karnataka Prohibition of Beggary Act, the term of office of the non-official members is three years and hence his removal is premature as well as a politically guided action. </p><p>On the other hand, the state government submitted that the very provision relied upon by Basavaraja states that the nomination is subject to the pleasure of the government.</p><p>The division bench pointed out that section 4 (3) unequivocally incorporates the doctrine of pleasure. It says that the term of the office of the non-official member shall be for a period of three years, but subject to the pleasure of the state government, the court said. </p><p>“The Doctrine of Pleasure when to be applied and invoked in relation to a person nominated to any Board or statutory body when his or her nomination is subjected to the Doctrine of Pleasure of the Government, there will be a little room to contend that nominee member is not permitted to complete the regular total period of the tenure of nomination,” the bench said.</p>.Karnataka High Court refuses to cancel H D Revanna's bail, grants bail to co-accused in abduction case.<p>The court further said, “Though the nomination can be viewed as a mode of appointment and it could be loosely used as a substitute for appointment, the nomination to the Committee under Section 4(2) of the Act read with Section 3 of the Act, has its own connotation and import to divest the petitioner of any exercisable right and entitled the State Government to prematurely cancel the status of the nominee petitioner under the doctrine of pleasure.”</p>