Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 07 JULY 2026

Karnataka High Court Held That A Public Servant Assuming Charge Of A Statutory Office Cannot Evade Responsibility For Pending Proceedings By Attributing Defaults To Their Predecessor

Sagus Legal
Sagus Legal
Contributor
Sagus Legal

Sagus Legal

We are a full-service law firm providing comprehensive legal advisory and advocacy to clients. Our...

View firm profile
Explore more from Sagus Legal

The High Court of Karnataka, through its judgment dated 15.06.2026 in Sri. Shivakumar C.L. v. State Information Commissioner & Anr. , dismissed a writ petition challenging the Karnataka Information Commission’s orders imposing penalty under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (“RTI Act”).

IndiaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Sagus Legal LLP
Sagus Legal LLP

The High Court of Karnataka, through its judgment dated 15.06.2026 in Sri. Shivakumar C.L. v. State Information Commissioner & Anr.1, dismissed a writ petition challenging the Karnataka Information Commission’s orders imposing penalty under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (“RTI Act”).

In the present case, Sri. Shivakumar C.L., was transferred and posted as Secretary of the Bangalore Development Authority on 07.05.2025 and assumed charge on 08.05.2025. The RTI Application was filed on 06.02.2023 and the first appeal had been preferred on 09.03.2023 which was much prior to the assumption of office by Sri. Shivakumar C.L. Therefore, it was contended by Sri. Shivakumar C.L. that all actions, omissions and decisions relating to the RTI proceedings during the said period were attributable exclusively to the predecessors.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

Decree Execution Under Order XXI CPC – An In-depth Insight

Order XXI of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 provides the comprehensive framework for executing decrees in Indian civil litigation. This article examines the procedural mechanisms for decree execution, including filing execution petitions, methods of property attachment, and the legal processes for recovering money decrees through sale of attached assets.
IndiaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Maheshwari & Co. Advocates & Legal Consultants
Maheshwari & Co. Advocates & Legal Consultants
Article

Section 35(3) BNSS Notice Is The Rule, Arrest An Exception For Offences Up To 7 Years: Supreme Court

In Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation, 2026 INSC 115, the Supreme Court of India has reiterated and strengthened the safeguards governing arrest under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), holding that issuance of notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS is the rule in cases involving offences punishable with imprisonment of up to seven years.
IndiaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Vaish Associates Advocates
Vaish Associates Advocates
Article

The Limitation Clock On Money Recovery: Understanding Article 113, Acknowledgment And Extension Under Indian Law

Understanding the critical timelines and legal frameworks governing money recovery suits in India requires navigating the complex interplay between the Limitation Act of 1963 and the Indian Contract Act of 1872. When does the clock actually start ticking on your right to sue, and how can acknowledgments or digital evidence extend or restart that crucial three-year window?
IndiaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Maheshwari & Co. Advocates & Legal Consultants
Maheshwari & Co. Advocates & Legal Consultants
Article

Supreme Court Affirms That Cheque Dishonour Complaints Cannot Be Quashed At The Pre-trial Stage Once Ingredients Of Section 138 Of The NI Act Are Satisfied

The Supreme Court through its judgement dated 07.04.2026 in Renuka v. the State of Maharashtra & Anr. affirmed that where the basic ingredients of an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 are satisfied, the complaint cannot be dismissed at the pre-trial stage on the ground that the cheque was not issued towards a legally enforceable debt.
IndiaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Sagus Legal
Sagus Legal
Article

Supreme Court Holds That Electricity Utilities Are Governed By The Rule Of Strict Liability, And Not Absolute Liability, In Claims Arising Out Of Electrocution

The Supreme Court of India, through its judgment dated 12.08.2026 in Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited v. Rekha and Others , set aside concurrent orders of the High Court of Karnataka which had fastened absolute liability upon the Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited (“KPTCL”) in respect of two electrocution incidents.
IndiaEnergy and Natural Resources
Sagus Legal
Sagus Legal
Article

CERC Issues Draft CERC (Connectivity And General Network Access To The Inter-State Transmission System) (Fourth Amendment) Regulations, 2026

The Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (“CERC”), vide Notification dated 20.05.2026, has issued the Draft CERC (Connectivity and General Network Access to the inter-State Transmission System) (Fourth Amendment) Regulations, 2026 (“Draft GNA Regulations”) , amending the CERC (Connectivity and General Network Access to the inter-State Transmission System) Regulations, 2022 (“Principal GNA Regulations”).
IndiaEnergy and Natural Resources
Sagus Legal
Sagus Legal