Advanced Search Results

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 … held from 1.7.1995 to 10.11.1995 which found the Petitioner guilty of four charges viz. 2nd, 3rd, 8th and 9th; he was acquitted on the remaining five charges. The petitioner was sentenced to eight months rigourous imprisonment together

N.R. Ajwani Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Service

Acts : Army Act, 1950 - Sections 18, 19, 63, 69, 117(3), 154, 160(4) and 165; Army Rules, 1954 - Rules 17, 23, 23(5), 82(3) and 147A; Indian Official Secrets Act, 1923 - Sections 3, 3(1) and 5; Army Pension Regulations, 1961 - Regulations 3 and 22; Constitution of India - Articles 1, 11, 14, 19(1), 19(5), 21, 31(1), 33, 53, 74, 74(1), 77, 154, 163(1), 226, 309, 310, 310(1), 311, 311(2) and 356; Air Force Act, 1950 - Sections 18 and 19; Air Force Rules, 1969 - Rule 16; Railway Establishment Code - Rules 148, 148(3), 149 and 149(3); Government of India Act, 1919 - Sections 96B; Constitution of India (Fiftieth Amendment) Act, 1984

Reported in : 95(2002)DLT770

neighbourly relations.' 35. The argument before the learned Single Judge was that order under Section 18 of the Army Act, 1950 had been passed without any justifiable reasons and it is an order of dismissal on account of misconduct … though he was mentioned as PW1 he was produced on 30.10.1979.26. In the Summary of Evidence recorded between 9.10.1979 and 29.11.1979, 18 witnesses were examined. None of them stated anything which could be put against the appellant.27.

Ajai Kumar Roy Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Subject : CriminalConstitution

Acts : Army Act, 1950 - Sections 101; Borders Security Force Rules, 1969 - Rule 40; Constitution of India - Article 21

Reported in : 2003CriLJ3999

permission to meet the detenu, but he was not allowed to see him. Under Section 101(1) of the Army Act, 1950 ('the Act' for brevity) it is the duty of the officer taking a person into military custody to … it reads as follows :15. Arrest.-- (1) Any member of the Force who commits any offence specified in Section 9 or Section 10 may be placed on open or close arrest by any officer within the Force.(2) Where

Deputy Inspector General, Border Security Force Vs. the State and anr.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 173, 446, 451, 475, 475(1) and 482; Border Security Force Act, 1968 - Sections 46, 80 and 81; Border Security Force Courts (Adjustment of Jurisdiction) Rules, 1969 - Rules 3 to 9; Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 279 and 337; Criminal Courts and Court Martial (Adjustment of Jurisdiction) Rules, 1952 - Rules 3 to 9; Army Act, 1950 - Sections 125 and 126

Reported in : 2002IIIAD(Delhi)433; 96(2002)DLT217; 2002(62)DRJ16

the Sections 80 and 81 of the BSF Act are equivalent to Sections 125 and 126 of the Army Act, 1950. She argued that under Section 46 of the BSF Act, offences under Sections 279/337 IPC with which accused … argued that Section 475 Cr.P.C. is equivalent to Section 549 of the old Code: that Rules 3 to 9 of the Criminal Courts and Border Security Force Courts (Adjustment of Jurisdiction) Rules, 1969 are equivalent to Rules

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

Court : Allahabad

Subject : Criminal

2 provides that the provisions of this Act 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, … Section 7 deals with appointment of Chairperson and other members. Section 8 deals with term of the office. Section 9 deals with resignation and removal; Section 10 deals with salaries, allowances and other terms and conditions of service

M.Z.H. Khan Vs. Chief of Army Staff, New Delhi and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Subject : Service

Acts : Army Act, 1950 - Sections 3, 3(4), 26, 27, 56, 56(A), 63, 71, 116, 122, 130, 164(2), 169, 169(1), 169(3) and 169(4); Army Rules, 1954 - Rules 33, 33(7), 34, 34(1), 34(2), 36, 106 to 133, 184 and 203; Constitution of India - Article 22(I)

Reported in : 2001(4)AWC2794; (2001)3UPLBEC2202

three months in civil jail,(b) to be dismissed from service.4. Petitioner filed statutory petition under Section 164(2) of Army Act, 1950, which was kept pending and not decided hence the petitioner filed a Writ Petition No. 37038 of 1998. … (I) Tk Tptr P1 ASC knowing such accusation to be false : (a) that between 5 and 6August 94 the said officerhas misappropriatedGovernment property bypermitting unauthorisedlifting of 11 barrels of F.O.L.from 680 (1) Tk Tptr P 1ASC

Ous Kutilingal Achudan Nair and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Constitution

Acts : Constitution of India - Articles 19(1) and 33; Army Act, 1950 - Sections 2(1), 3, 9 and 21; Army Rules, 1954 - Rules 19(11) and 79; Defence of India Act - Sections 4; Industrial Disputes Act

Reported in : AIR1976SC1179; 1976LabIC780; (1976)2SCC780; [1976]2SCR769; 1976(8)LC43(SC)

not fall under any of the categories enumerated in Sub-clauses (a) to (i) of Section 2 of the Army Act, 1950, and that the impugned notifications are ultra vires the Army Act and are struck by Articles 19(1)(c) and … the training establishments and Military Hospitals have been taken out of the purview of the Industrial Disputes Act.15. Section 9 of the Army Act further empowers the Central Government to declare by notification, persons not covered by Section

J.S. Sekhon Vs. Union of India

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Army Regulation

Acts : Section 130, 122 (1) (b) of the Army Act, 1950; Rule-44 of the Army Rules,1954

objections of being tried by any officer sitting on the court in accordance with Section 130 of the Army Act, 1950 read with Rule-44 of the Army Rules, 1954. He raised no objection at the time. However, at a … on 6.12.1994 investigated the contract agreements. A vigilance check was performed by the Commander Works Engineers (CWE) on 9.12.1994. CWE then asked the appellant for his comments on the report which were submitted on 6.2.1995. Discrepancies detected

Ordinance Clothing Factory Workers Union Rep. by Its Secretary, N.J. R ...

Court : Chennai

Subject : Other Taxes

Acts : Army Act, 1950 - Sections 2, 2(1), 3 and 21; Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act - Sections 124D and 124J; Territorial Army Act, 1948 - Sections 9(1); Air Force Act, 1950; Navy Act, 1957; Central Reserve Police Force Act, 1949; Army Rules, 1954 - Rule 19; Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965; Civil Service Regulations; Constitution of India - Articles 19 and 33

Reported in : (2009)6MLJ269

SC 1179 wherein, in paragraph Nos. 11 and 12, it has been held as follows:11. In enacting the Army Act, 1950, insofar as it restricts or abrogates any of the fundamental rights of the members of the armed forces, … modifications as may be made in the application of this Act to such persons under Sub-section (1) of Section 9 of the Territorial Army Act, 1948 (56 of 1948.)(f) persons holding commissions in the Army in India Reserve

Gurman Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Subject : Criminal

Reported in : 1984CriLJ718

assembly of the court of enquiry is in the nature of review which is not authorised by the Army Act, 1950 or the rules framed thereunder and as such the convening of the Court of Inquiry for the second … compensation of the loss was preferred by the Supply Depot ASC Panagarh in accordance with the provisions of Section 78B of the Indian Railways (Amendment) Act of 1961 which was registered by the railways and the same … 23rd September, 1982 annexed as annexure 'D' to the writ application. On 9th October, 1982, the petitioner received a letter from the Administrative Officer intimating