Skip to content

Advanced Search Results

Act1: architects act 1972 section 22 · Page 1 of about 211 results (0.054 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 07 2018

Rajinder Kumar vs.council of Architecture & Anr

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Aug-07-2018

Subject : Right to Information

public notice whereby it was stated that the Council has been receiving complaints regarding the violation of the Architects Act, 1972 (hereafter ‗the Act‘) by foreign architects, consulting firms and others by way of hiring foreign architects to provide … Profession. The profession of architects is regulated, controlled and maintained under the Act and Regulations is empowered under Section 22 of the Act to lay down thereunder. The Council the provisions of framed W.P.(C) 1787/2017 Page 4 of

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Oct 18 2008

Ranjan Lakule Vs. Council of Architecture India Habitant Centre and or ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Oct-18-2008

Subject : Civil

Acts : Architects Act, 1972 - Sections 21, 30, 30(1), 35 and 45; Architects Act (Professional Misconduct) Regulations, 1989 - Regulations 1(2), 3, 3(1) and 3(3); Minimum Standards of Architectural Education Regulations Act, 1983; Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994 - Sections 78; Right to Information Act (RTI); Council of Architecture Rules, 1973 - Rule 35(1)

Reported in : 2009(2)BomCR479

as the Conduct Regulations. These have been framed pursuant to the powers conferred under Section 45 of the Architects Act, 1972. Nowhere in the complaint or in the show-cause notice issued or in the notice for hearing have respondent … post at the degree level education are prescribed. According to the respondent, these qualifications have been modified on 22nd January, 2002, 20th November 2004 and 20th April, 2005. We really would not be concerned with the qualifications

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jul 24 1989

Utpal Bose and Others Vs. State of West Bengal and Others

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Jul-24-1989

Subject : CivilProperty

Acts : Calcutta Municipal Corporation Act, 1980 - Sections 414, 414(3) and 599;; Calcutta Municipal Corporation (Amendment) Act, 1977 - Section 378;; Architects Act, 1972 - Sections 2, 23, 25, 27, 29, 44, 44(2), 47 and 123;; Constitution of India - Article 246;; Bidhan Nagar Building Rules - Rule 50;; Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 - Section 502

Reported in : AIR1991Cal48

was an upsurge of under-qualified persons describing themselves as architects and resulting in unsafe work of construction. The Architects Act, 1972 was engrafted in the Statute Book to provide for the registration of architects so as to eradicate the … so as to eradicate the unqualified and under-qualified persons taking upon the responsibility in that regard as architects.2. Section 25 of the Act of 1972 provides that a person shall be entitled, on payment of a fee … purpose of carrying on the profession including the works contained in Chapter 22 of the Calcutta Municipal Corporation Act read with Sch. 16 of the

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

18-section briefs on any result in this list

Apr 25 2018

Sudhir Vohra vs.registrar of Companies and Ors.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Apr-25-2018

Subject : Education

first writ petition bearing No.W.P.(C) No.934/2012 has been preferred by Mr. Sudhir Vohra, an architect registered under the Architects Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act"), mainly seeking the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the Registrar … ethical standards to be followed while carrying out the profession of an architect. He draws my attention to Section 22 of the Act to contend that this provision enables the COA to prescribe a code of ethics for

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Feb 08 2023

Sharan Desai M.arch Usa Vs. The State Of Karnataka

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Feb-08-2023

Subject : Education

04-01-2021, seeking nomination as a Member of the Council representing the Government of Karnataka, in terms of the Architects Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for short). On 23-06-2021, when the petitioner did not receive any reply … may be discussed at the time of discussion of a motion. Regulation 22 deals with constitution and conduct of business of the committees of the … for short) was also promulgated on 20-02-1973. Chapter-II of the Act deals with Constitution of Council of Architecture. Section 3 thereof, reads as follows: “3. Constitution of Council of Architecture.-(1) The Central Government shall, by notification in

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Sep 17 1982

Om Prikash Mittal Vs. Council of Architecture and ors.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Sep-17-1982

Subject : Constitution

Acts : Architects Act, 1972 - Sections 25

Reported in : AIR1983Delhi223; ILR1983Delhi197

petition is dismissed but in the circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. Architects Act, 1972 - Sections 25(b), 35 & 37--Order refusing registration to the petitioner whether discriminatory and vocative of the Constitution--Whether … the courses for the training of architects and to enforce academic standards through the institutions training in architecture. Section 22 empowers the council to frame regulations to prescribe professional conduct, etiquette and a code of ethics for architects.

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Feb 08 2017

Indian Institute of Architects vs.national Building Construction Corpo ...

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Feb-08-2017

Subject : Service Tax

has been assailed in the present petition primarily on the following grounds: (i) NIT is in violation of Architects Act, 1972 and the Regulations framed thereunder. Having invited tenders for providing "comprehensive architectural services", NBCC should not have allowed … engineering consultants also to submit bids along with architects. The said action of NBCC is in violation of Sections 35, 36 and 37 of the Architects Act, 1972. W.P.(C) No.8635/2016 & 9702/2016 Page 2 of 11 (ii) … questions are in negative, then there should be no interference under Article 226." W.P.(C) No.8635/2016 & 9702/2016 Page 9 of 11 20. It was further

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Feb 08 2017

Indian Institute of Archetects vs.union of India and Ors.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Feb-08-2017

Subject : Service Tax

has been assailed in the present petition primarily on the following grounds: (i) NIT is in violation of Architects Act, 1972 and the Regulations framed thereunder. Having invited tenders for providing "comprehensive architectural services", NBCC should not have allowed … engineering consultants also to submit bids along with architects. The said action of NBCC is in violation of Sections 35, 36 and 37 of the Architects Act, 1972. W.P.(C) No.8635/2016 & 9702/2016 Page 2 of 11 (ii) … questions are in negative, then there should be no interference under Article 226." W.P.(C) No.8635/2016 & 9702/2016 Page 9 of 11 20. It was further

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

May 16 2017

The Indian Institute of Architects vs.national Building Construction C ...

Court : Delhi

Decided on : May-16-2017

Subject : Education

for engaging the services of foreign architects is in contravention of the provisions of Section 37(1) of the Architects Act, 1972. The petitioner, therefore, seeks a direction to the respondent No.4 to establish an institutionalized system and lay down … While dismissing the writ petition being WP(C)No.9702/2016, on 8th February, 2017, the court has observed thus: “W.P.(C) No.9702/2016 22. It is alleged by the petitioner that the impugned approval granted by the respondent No.1 for engaging the

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Mar 24 2015

Silicon Graphics Systems (India) P. Ltd. Vs. Sterling and Wilson Elect ...

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Mar-24-2015

Subject : Arbitration

of limitation during which a claim could be raised to be hit by Section 28 of the Contract Act, 1972. He accordingly submitted that the minority Award holding that the claim was barred by limitation was contrary to … in terms of Clause 98.1 of the contract, the Respondent was bound to inform the Petitioner or their Architect within 28 days, i.e., within 6th April 1999 in the case of the DG sets contract and within … penalty. Further reminders about the outstanding payments were sent on 7th and 22nd September 1999.13. Considerable reliance was placed by the learned counsel for the

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