Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
M.NAGAPRASANNA
Sunil, S/o. Annappa Sank – Appellant
Versus
State Of Karnataka, Represented By Chief Secretary, Government Of Karnataka – Respondent
ORDER :
M.NAGAPRASANNA, J.
The petitioner, who had been entrusted with the Office of the Additional District Government Pleader, at XI Additional District and Session Court, Belagavi, Sitting at Athani, District Belagavi, knocks at the doors of this Court, to challenge the notification dated 29-10-2025, issued by the 2nd respondent, by which – within a breathless span of 24 hours, the appointment of the petitioner made on 28.10.2025, is rescinded, and the 3rd respondent is appointed to the said post.
2. Shorn of unnecessary details, facts in brief, are as follows:
On 06-07-2024, a long-standing demand for establishing a Courts of Sessions at Athani, finally crystallized into reality. With this establishment arose, the concomitant need for appointing an Additional District Government Pleader (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Government Pleader’ for short). Pending such appointment, the Government placed the already serving Government Pleader on additional Charge on 19-09-2024.
3. Owing to the necessity of appointment of a regular Government Pleader, the petitioner, a practicing Advocate since 1999, finding himself eligible on all fours, tenders a representation 09-10-2024 bringing to the
The doctrine of pleasure does not permit arbitrary or capricious exercise of power by the State, and such actions must comply with principles of fairness and Article 14 of the Constitution.
Doctrine of Pleasure that is invoked to remove the pleaders is not absolute. Non-arbitrariness is that golden thread that runs through entire fabric of Constitution through which every bead of state ....
"Doctrine of Pleasure" has its genesis under common law - A public servant could be dismissed from service by Crown at its pleasure.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Doctrine of Pleasure cannot be invoked in an arbitrary manner, and valid reasons are required for the removal of an appointed member. The ....
The doctrine of pleasure allows for removal from office without notice or reason, provided it is not arbitrary, and does not apply to those holding civil posts under the Constitution.
The doctrine of pleasure permits removal from office without notice or reason, provided it is not arbitrary, and does not apply to those not holding civil posts under the Constitution.
The doctrine of pleasure permits removal from office without adherence to principles of natural justice when the appointee does not hold a civil post.
The Governor's power to remove nominated Chairmen of Zilla Grandhalaya Samsthas under Section 11(3) of the Act is not absolute and is subject to the procedure prescribed under Section 18-A of the Act....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
