Advanced Search Results

Wing Commander Rajiv Arora Vs. Union and India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Constitution

Acts : Air Force Act, 1950 - Sections 109, 40, 45, 47, 48, 65, 110, 129, 152 and 161(1); Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Sections 491; Air-Force Rules, 1969 - Rules 24, 37, 37(3), 43, 43(4), 49, 50, 52, 53, 54, 59, 113, 154 and 156; Constitution of India - Article 226

Reported in : 2007(93)DRJ229

the said Court had assembled at Gandhinagar (Gujarat). With reference to the provisions of Section 152 of the Air Force Act, 1950, it is stated that no finding or sentence of a general, district or summary general court-martial shall be … witnesses, as such there was no violation of any rule or regulation even in this regard. Under Rule 113 of the Air Force Rule, 1969 the prosecution was entitled to examine the witnesses who had not been

Air Cmde Mrigendra Singh, Vsm Vs. Union of India, Represented by the S ...

Court : Guwahati

Subject : Education

records were sought for by respondent No.8 purportedly in exercise of his powers under Section 108 of the Air Force Act, 1950, though he does not, according to the petitioner, have such an authority. The obtaining of the call records … officer's or airman's character or service reputation was being adversely affected or how he appeared to be blameworthy. 113. Thus, while Para 790 comes into play after materials are brought on record adversely affecting the character or

Hav. Ved Prakash Sangwan Vs. Union of India

Court : Delhi

Subject : Service

Acts : Constitution of India - Articles 14, 21 and 226; Army Act, 1950 - Sections 20 and 23; Army Rules, 1954 - Rules 11, 12 and 17; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 360

Reported in : 2000VAD(Delhi)749

the defense Department where services of a person were dispensed with invoking power under Section 18 of the Air Force Act, 1950. That Section reads as under:- '18. Tenure of service under the Act._Every person subject to this Act shall … been considered and he should have been granted pension. The third point taken is that the Pension Regulation 113 is ultra virus the Constitution, which confers an arbitrary power on the authority concerned to deprive the persons

Shyamabai Wd/O Surajkaran Joshi and ors. Vs. Madan Mohan Mandir Sansth ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Trusts and Societies

Acts : Indian Trusts Act, 1882 - Sections 1, 19, 20, 47, 48 and 83; Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 - Sections 2(13) and 2(20); Societies Registration Act, 1860 - Sections 6; Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Vidarbha Region) Act, 1958 - Sections 19(1) and 129; Transfer of Property Act; Land Acquisition Act, 1894; Bombay Public Trusts Rules, 1951 - Rule 8; Constitution of India - Article 141

Reported in : 2010(1)BomCR294

down by the Full Bench of Gujarat High Court in Atmaram Ranchhodbhai v. Gulamhusein Gulam Mohiyaddin and Anr. AIR 1973 Guj 113 is also not a good law on the subject and the law laid down by … of Sarda Education Trust (cited supra) was holding field and was in force, there was no occasion for making a reference to the larger Bench … public trust on the strength of definition of Public Trust under Section 2(13) of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 ?Similarly, Justice C.L. Pangarkar, in view of conflicting decisions, also referred following issues to the larger Bench for

Naib-subedar Sethurathinam Vs. Union of India Represented by Its Secre ...

Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Chennai

Subject : Land Acquisition

of the Army Act, 1950 (46 of 1950) or the Navy Act, 1957 (62 of 1957) or the Air Force Act, 1950, (45 of 1950) as the case may be; or (b) if sentence is found to be excessive, illegal … have been grave violations such as pre-trial custody not being set off which is violative of Army Act Section 169-A, non-compliance of Supreme Courts order, not passing any order on the post-confirmation petition and illegally destroying the … too his impeccable conduct earned him a remission of 10 months. Section 113(a) of Pension Regulations for the Army is not a blanket ban on

Sukhdev Singh Gill Vs. State of Punjab and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Service

Acts : Punjab Government National Emergency (Concession) Rules, 1965 - Rule 2; Army Act, 1950 - Sections 3, 4(1), 63, 73, 81(4), 113, 114 and 116(1); Constitution of India - Articles 33 and 352

Reported in : [2000(87)FLR951]; 2000(7)SCALE259; (2000)8SCC492; [2000]Supp4SCR292; (2001)1UPLBEC664

Section 3(xi) of the Army Act which reads as follows:(xi) 'the Forces' means the regular Army, Navy and Air Force or any part of any one or more of them; 12. This Court also referred 7to Section 4(1) … considered the nature of the service in the G.R.E.F. and the applicability of certain provisions of the Army Act, 1950 for the purpose of taking disciplinary action against the Officers of the G.R.E.F. In that judgment this Court … the Notification relates to certain amendments in Sections 3, 63, 73, 81(4), 113, 114 and 116(1) of the said Act. In the above judgment, this

Rama Sundari Devi Vs. Indu Bhusan Bose

Court : Kolkata

Subject : Constitution

Acts : Constitution of India; ;Government of India Act, 1935; ;The West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956; ;Cantonments (Extension of Rent Control Laws) Act, 1957

Reported in : AIR1967Cal355

Government may by notification declare any place or places in which any part of the Indian army or air force is quartered, or which being in the vicinity of any such place or places is or are required … occupation of himself and his family, within the meaning of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950. This Act was a State Act but was made applicable to the Nasirabad cantonment area in which the … Sinha, C.J.1. This is a reference by the Munsif, third court, Sealdah under Section 113 of the Code of Civil Procedure and Article 228 of the Constitution. The facts in this case are

Jc-116244 Ex-subedar Joginder Singh Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Service

Acts : Army Act, 1950 - Sections 52 and 164(2); Pension Regulations for the Army, 1961 - Regulations 16 and 113

Reported in : [2003(96)FLR376]; JT2001(9)SC23; 2001LabIC4012; 2001(7)SCALE263; (2001)9SCC602; 2001(4)SCT1012(SC); (2002)1UPLBEC150

say, - (a) commits theft of any property belonging to the Government, or to any military, naval or air force mess, band or institution, or to any person subject to military, naval or air force law; or (b) … limine on 8.9.1998. Hence this appeal.2. We notice the relevant provisions of the Army Act and Regulations:-The Army Act, 1950 'Section 52. Offences in respect of property. - Any person subject to this Act who commits any of the … appellant made representation to the President of India on 26.8.1996 under Regulation 113(a) of the Pension Regulations for the Army, 1961 (Part-I) for the grant

Chief of Army Staff and ors. Vs. Major Dharam Pal Kukrety

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Service

Acts : Army Rules, 1954 - Rules 14(2) and 71; Army Act - Sections 121, 153 and 160

Reported in : AIR1985SC703; 1985CriLJ913; 1986LabIC41; (1985)IILLJ165SC; 1985(1)SCALE582; (1985)2SCC412; [1985]3SCR415; 1985(17)LC863(SC)

G.B. Singh v. Union of India and Ors. [1973] Crl. L.J. 485. That was a case under the Air Force Act, 1950 (Act No. 45 of 1950). In that case, the officer was found guilty by a general court-martial and … Staff or by any officer empowered in that behalf by warrant of the Chief of the Army Staff. Section 113 provides that a general court-martial shall consist of not less than five officers, each of whom has held

The Union Carbide (India) Ltd. Vs. Ramesh Kumbla and Others

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Labour and Industrial

Acts : Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Sections 2 and 33; Industrial Disputes Act, 1985 - Sections 2; Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 - Sections 3(5), 28 and 44; Constitution of India - Article 227; Trade Union Act, 1926; Air Force Act, 1950; Navy Act, 1957; Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972

Reported in : 1999(1)ALLMR540; 1999(1)BomCR705; 1999(2)MhLj63

led to that dispute, but does not include any such person - (i) who is subject to the Air Force Act, 1950, or the Navy Act, 1957; or (ii) who is employed in the Police service or as an officer … September, 1980 in the Labour Court at Mumbai being Complaint (ULP) No. 113 of 1980 alleging unfair labour practices under Item 1(a), (b), (d), (f) … the preliminary issue that the complaint was maintainable since respondent No. 1 was a 'workman', as defined in section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short 'I.D. Act') or an employee as defined in clause