Advanced Search Results

Ex. L/Nk Rameshwar Lal Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Subject : Service

Acts : Army Act, 1950 - Sections 20 and 22; Army Rules, 1954 - Rules 13 and 17

Reported in : RLW2003(1)Raj216; 2002(3)WLN653; 2002(3)WLN653

to say in this regard and an action would be taken in terms of Section 20 of the Army Act, 1950 read with Rule 13 of the Army Rules, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules of 1954). (x) … Court or a court-martial, no person shall be dismissed or removed under Sub-section (1) or Sub-section (3) of Section 30, unless he has been informed of the particulars of the cause of action against him and allowed reasonable

Major Viveky Rai Vs. Uoi and ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Ranbir Penal Code (IPC) - Section 302; Arms Act - Section 30; Army Act 1950 - Sections 18, 19

for 5 years. The ultimate decision taken was to invoke the Presidential power under Section 18 of the Army Act 1950. Order dated 11.9.2009 was issued, which reads as under:- "ORDER The President, in exercise of powers conferred by … the petitioner was tried for an offence punishable under Section 302 of the Ranbir Penal Code as also Section 30 of the Arms Act. The trial was conducted before the Court of Sessions. 2. Due to the seriousness

Daya Shankar Tiwari Vs. Chief of the Army Staff, New Delhi and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Subject : Service

Acts : Army Act, 1950 - Sections 20(3) and 106; Army Rules - Rule 17

Reported in : 2002(3)AWC2142; (2002)2UPLBEC1634

such, he was declared deserter with effect from 2.5.1996. A Court of Inquiry was heldunder Section 106 of Army Act, 1950 and being a peace deserter, the petitioner was dismissed from service w.e.f. 21.10.1999 in terms of Army Act … was recommended for being relieved from Army service. This recommendation was approbated by A.D.M.S. U.P. Area, Bareilly, on 30.7.1987 andconsequently, petitioner was discharged from Army w.e.f. 1.9.1987 vide discharge order dated 10.3.1987 which was served upon the

Colonel Aniltej Singh Dhaliwal Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and 2 ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Service

Acts : Army Act, 1950 - Sections 2(2), 71, 153 and 163; Army Rules; Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Sections 11A

Reported in : 2002(64)DRJ854

appropriate orders on the question of sentence in exercise of the powers vested under Section 163 of the Army Act, 1950, after modifying the Court's previous order dated 10.5.1999. This application was vehemently opposed by the Petitioner herein in … dated October 28, 1999, is enclosed herewith as Annexure Rule 7. Respondent then received a telegram on October 30, 1999, a copy whereof is at Annexure Rule 8. The appellants wrote a letter dated October 21, 1999

Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. V.N. Singh

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Service

Acts : Army Act, 1950 - Sections 1, 2, 37, 122, 122(1), 123, 153, 154 and 160; ;Constitution of India - Article 226; ;Army Rules - Rules 22 and 177; ;Defence Service Regulations

the High Court of Delhi in C.W.P. No. 5451 of 1998 by which (1) the order dated October 30, 1996 invoking Section 123 of the Army Act and taking the respondent in close custody (2) the findings … the respondent by Court Martial was time barred in view of the provisions of Section 122(1)(b) of the Army Act, 1950.2. The facts emerging from the record of the case are as under:The respondent i.e. Mr. V.N. Singh who

Ex. Major R.S. Budhwar Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Army Rules, 1959 - Rules 22 to 25 and 37; Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 226

Reported in : 58(1995)DLT339; 1995(34)DRJ426

was a prima facie case against these three accused persons which ought to be proceeded with under the Army Act, 1950 and that they be tried by a General Court-Martial. Signed at Dinjan this Fourth day of January, 1989.Place: … deposition at the GCM of the petitioner17.6.1989 The main requirement of admissibility of evidence, as laid down by Section 30 of the Indian Evidence Act enjoins that the statement of one accused to be admissible against the co-accused

Pravat Saha @ Pravat Kumar Saha Vs. Union of India Service Through the ...

Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Kolkata

Subject : Land Acquisition

imprisonment (RI) by his Commanding Officer under a proper ‘offence report charged under Section 39 (a) of the Army Act, 1950. Therefore, it was, according to him, illegal to punish him again by discharging him from service for the … Headquarter, he was discharged from service on 4th March 2006 for being absent from training for more than 30 days consecutively. The petitioner represented against such discharge order before the higher authorities including a petition from his

Raipur Development Authority Etc. Etc. Vs. M/S. Chokhamal Contractors ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Arbitration

Acts : Arbitration Act, 1940 - Sections 2, 3, 13, 14, 15, 16,17, 20, 21, 30, 34, 35, 39 and 46; Indian Contract Act, 1872 - Sections 28; Madras Regulation Act; Limitation Act, 1963 - Article 119; National Health Service Act, 1946; Tribunals and Inquiries Act, 1958 - Sections 12; Mines & Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957; Constitution of India - Articles 136, 226 and 227; Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Sections 10A; Bengal Reulation Act; Indian Arbitraton Act, 1899 - Sections 30; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908; Army Act, 1950 - Sections 164 and 165

Reported in : [1989]3SCR144

is manifest that there is no express obligation imposed by Section 164 or by Section 165 of the Army Act on the confirming authority or upon the Central Government to give reasons in support of its decision to … arbitrator to state his award in the form of a special case under Section 21 of the Arbitration Act, 1950. It is submitted that the provision with regard to the statement of the case by an arbitrator to … liable either to be remitted under Section 16(1)(c) of the Act or liable to be set aside under Section 30(c) thereof merely on the ground that no reasons have been given by the arbitrator or umpire, as the

Shri Suryakant @ Bandu Ranoji Andekar Vs. the State of Maharashtra, Th ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Army Act, 1950 - Sections 69; Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 302; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Sections 433A

Reported in : 2005CriLJ4478

life imprisonment pursuant to the conviction under Sec. 302 of the I.P.C. read with Sec. 69 of the Army Act, 1950. Nevertheless, the Apex Court therein has clearly held that 'Section 433-A would operate in the field and a … the effect that his detention in Yerwada Central Prison by the respondents for the period from 19.5.2003 to 30.12.2003 was illegal and on that count seeks direction to the respondents to pay compensation of Rs.2 lacs. The

Capt. K.M. Saxena Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Subject : Constitution

Acts : Constitution of India - Articles 21 and 226; Army Act - Sections 106

Reported in : 2000(3)ALT416

the respondents. Learned Counsel, in this connection, has also drawn our attention to few relevant provisions of the Army Act, 1950. Learned Counsel submitted that the detention of Lt. Col. S.S. Shekhar cannot be termed as illegal detention requiring … that the detenu who was taken into custody under the impugned order enjoyed total immunity from arrest Under Section 30 of the Army Act, which provided immunity even from arrest under any Civil Law.5. According to the petitioner,