Skip to content

Advanced Search Results

Act1: air force act 1950 section 98 · Page 1 of about 436 results (0.095 seconds)

Pulse this search Log in to save a LexPulse alert for this search

AI Studio

AI Brief on every result

Start a 7-day free trial - 18-section briefs and case chat on any judgment in these results, plus Semantic Search on your next query.

Aug 17 2013

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

Court : Guwahati

Decided on : Aug-17-2013

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 … may be provided to the undersigned so as to produce in front of the Court of Inquiry: (a) 9864230600 (b) 9864297476 (c) 9864765132 (d) 9435002698 (e) 9707791027 3. Your kind co-operation in this regard is highly solicited.

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Aug 26 1998

Sgt. Indera Bahadur Singh and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Aug-26-1998

Subject : Service

Acts : Army Law

Reported in : 1998(47)DRJ374

Articles 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India.32. Mr. Narender Kaushik referred to Section 2 of the Air Force Act, 1950. Section 2 reads as under: -'Persons subject to this Act-The following persons shall be subject to this Act wherever … higher rank. This will be applicable for all airmen whose regular engagement expires on or after 01 Jul 98.'43. The power of the Chief of Air Staff to prescribe the formula or the method cannot at all

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Feb 25 2010

Devi Saran Mishra Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Feb-25-2010

Subject : Criminal

would apply to the persons who are subject to the Army Act, 1950, Navy Act, 1957 and the Air Force Act, 1950. It will also apply to the retired Army personnel, including their dependents, heirs and successors in so for … been answered in paragraphs 77, 79, 80,81, 82, 92, 93, 94, 97, 98, 100 and 101, which are being extracted below:77. To express our opinion … that this Court should take note of the change in the legal provision as has been introduced under Section 34 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007, and the present writ petition should be transferred to the

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

18-section briefs on any result in this list

Aug 11 2000

J.W.O. B.K. Singh Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Aug-11-2000

Subject : Constitution

Acts : Constitution of India - Articles 14, 21, 226 and 227;; Air Force Act, 1950 - Sections 4(XV), 34 to 71, 110, 121, 152, 153 and 161;; Army Rules - Rule 37;; Air Force Rules, 1969 - Rules 34 to 38, 40, 40(1), 43 and 43(2), (3) and (8);; Station Routine Orders

Reported in : (2000)3CALLT528(HC)

by any officer empowered for that behalf by warrant of the Central Government under section 153 of the Air Force Act. 1950 (for short 'the Act'). The respondent has moved CAN No 7513 of 1999 for vacating and/or recalling the

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Mar 07 2012

Chandrasekharasharma Vs. C. Krishnaiah Chetty

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Mar-07-2012

Subject : Labour and Industrial

Acts : Constitution Of India - Articles 226, 227; Industrial Disputes Act - Section 3, 1947 - Sections 10(1)(c), 2(s), 2(oo)(bb), 2(b), 2(rr); andhra pradesh Shops and Establishments Act, 1988 - section 48(1); Sales Act - Section 1(4); Dock Workers Act 1948 - Section 5A; Sales Promotion Employees (Conditions of Service) Act, 1976 ; Workmen's Compensation Act. 1923; Industrial Disputes Act, 1947; Minimum Wages Act, 1948 Maternity Benefit Act, 1961; Payment of Bonus Act. 1965; Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972; Air Force Act, 1950; Army Act, 1950; Navy Act, 1957; Navy Act 1934; Plantation Labour Act, 1951 - Section 2; Industrial Disputes (ID) Act; Amending Act 1982;

has led to that dispute, but does not include any such person -(i) who is subject to the Air Force Act, 1950 (45 of 1950), or the Army Act, 1950, (46 of 1950), or the Navy Act, 1957 (62 of … in full and final settlement of accounts. Petitioner was also informed that this action was in accordance with section 2(oo)(bb) of Industrial Disputes Act. Aggrieved by the said action petitioner raised a dispute before the Labour Commissioner

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Aug 22 1968

Belapur Co. Ltd. Vs. Maharashtra State Farming Corporation

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Aug-22-1968

Subject : Property

Acts : Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 91 to 98; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908

Reported in : AIR1969Bom231; 1970MhLJ330

the Privy Council in the case of Baijnath Singh v. Hajee Valley Mahomed 27 Bom LR 787 = AIR 1925 PC 75 in which the same question as in Balkrishan Das' case arose not, however, in relation … their factory at Harigaton in Ahmednagar District since the last about 45 years. Prior to the coming into force of the Maharashtra agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act (Maharashtra Act XXVII of 1961) on the 26th of … Court then proceeded to state that the other sections, viz. 95 to 98 of the Evidence Act, deal with ambiguities, peculiarities in the expression and … State Government, subject, of course, to payment of compensation as therein provided. Section 28 of the said Act which is important for the purpose of

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Aug 18 1999

Col. Dhama B.S. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Aug-18-1999

Subject : ServiceCivil

Acts : Air Force Act, 1969 - Sections 102 and 103; Constitution of India - Article 226

Reported in : 81(1999)DLT255; 1999(51)DRJ15

absentee and absented himself without leave on the following occasions and thus committing offence under Section 39 of Air Force Act, 1950. From 0730 h 16.11.96 to 0730 h 18.11.96 From 0730 h 17.12.96 to 0730 h 19.12.96 From 0730 … three weeks. The orders of this Hon'ble Court were complied with. That this Hon'ble Court on 14 May 98 vacated the interim stay order granted and directed Col. Dhama BS to join at Pune with his family

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Dec 08 2010

D.P Tripathy Vs. Union of India and Others

Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Principal Bench New Delhi

Decided on : Dec-08-2010

Subject : MRTP

read and explained the provision of Section 84 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 142 of the Air Force Act to the appellant and suggested to him to withdraw his plea of guilty. The court advised the appellant … Sgt Kumar S IAF/P of 26 PandS Unit, AF on 24 Apr 98. SECOND CHARGE Section 39(b) AF Act 1950 WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE OVERSTAYING LEAVE … the authorities were not convinced and court martialled him for the following offences. FIRST CHARGE SECTION 39(b) AF ACT 1950 WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE OVERSTAYING LEAVE GRANTED TO HIM in that he, at No. 77 SU, AF having been

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Feb 23 1999

K. Shankar Vs. Flt. Lt. Saji Thomas and Others

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Feb-23-1999

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 109, 323, 352 and 355; Air Force Act, 1950 - Sections 4, 124 and 126; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 472 and 475; Criminal Court and Court Martial (Adjustment of Jurisdiction) Rules, 1978 - Rules 2 and 5

Reported in : 1999(2)ALD560; 1999(1)ALD(Cri)626; 1999(2)ALT286

charged with offences under Sections 323, 352, 355 and 109 of IPC, are the persons subject to the Air Force Act, 1950. And whereas I am the Commanding Officer in respect of the above accused persons, the competent authority as … persons attached to Air Force Station Begumpet, who have been brought before you and charged with offences under Sections 323, 352, 355 and 109 of IPC, are the persons subject to the Air Force Act, 1950. And … accused Officers on 15-7-1998. This memo is reproduced :'Beg/C 2109/1/23/P1 15 Jul 98 The Hon'ble Metropolitan Magistrate IV Metropolitan Magistrate Nampally, Hyderabad In the case

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jul 21 1998

Ex. Sq. Leader Anil Gupta Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Jul-21-1998

Subject : Service

Acts : Air Force Rules, 1969 - Rule 17

Reported in : 76(1998)DLT554

him to show cause as to why he should not be removed from the service under Section 19, Air Force Act, 1950 read with Rule 17, Air Force Rules, 1969 for avoiding flying duties and showing lack of confidence in

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

AI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free

  • ‹ Prev
  • Last »

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial