Advanced Search Results

B.V. Ramnarayan Vs. State Bank of India, Hyderabad and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Subject : Labour and Industrial

Acts : State Bank of India (Supervising Staff) Service Rules - Rule 92; Border Security Force Act, 1968 - Sections 11(2)

Reported in : 1996(4)ALT753; (1997)ILLJ1007AP

in the Border Security Force was dismissed from service by the Commandant acting under Section 11(2) of the Border Security Force Act, 1968 on the ground that he was a deserter, without holding enquiry. Before the Supreme Court, the questions were … abandoned the service with effect from August 29, 1983 and thereby forfeited his appointment in terms of Rule 92 of the State Bank of India (Supervising Staff) Service Rules, for short 'the Rules', is called in question

Rakesh Kumar Sharma Vs. Uoi

Court : Delhi

Subject : Service

Acts : Border Security Force Act 1968 - Section 35

the Initiating Officer can sufficiently be justified, we dismiss the writ petition but refrain from imposing any costs. Border Security Force Act 1968 - Section 35 - Falsifying official documents and false declarations -- A letter dated 15.04.1993 highlights the poor functioning of

Head Const. Hardev Singh Vs. Union of India and Others

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Constitution of India - Article 227; Border Security Force Act, 1968 - Sections 46, 107 and 108; Border Security Rules, 1969 - Rule 48; Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 302, 304 and 304A; Evidence Act - Sections 24

Reported in : 2000CriLJ2585

months from the receipt of the Court order. The respondents defended the vires of the provisions of the Border Security Force Act, 1968 and the Border Security Force Rules, 1969 and contended that the same were in accordance with the provisions … his attitude, prosecutor closed his evidence at 1200 hrs on 26 May 92, thereafter I was called upon to produce any defence witness if desired … the charge-sheet dated 14th May, 1992. The charge-sheet was served on the petitioner for committing civil offence under Section 46 of the BSF Act, i.e. the offence of murder, punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal

Gouranga Chakraborty Vs. State of Tripura and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : ServiceConstitution

Acts : Border Security Force Act, 1968 - Sections 11(2), (4), 19, 48, 59 and 141; Border Security Force Rules, 1969 - Rules 6 and 177; Constitution of India - Article 311

Reported in : AIR1989SC1321; JT1989(Suppl1)SC86; 1989(1)SCALE793; (1989)3SCC314; [1989]2SCR271; 1989(2)LC252(SC)

dismissed from service by the Commandant by order dated January 5, 1972 in accordance with the provisions of Border Security Force Act, 1968 and the Rules framed thereunder.6. The Munsiff held that the plaintiff was given reasonable opportunity before the Commandant … without costs.3. The plaintiff-appellant was enrolled as a Constable No. 66922189 under 92 Bn, BSF in Tripura and he was serving as such since 1966. … February 3, 1972. No relief was granted to him.4. The appellant as plaintiff after serving a notice under Section 80 of the CPC and as no redress was given to him, filed Title Suit No. 33 of

Randhir Singh Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Subject : Service

Acts : Constitution of India - Articles 14, 16, 21 and 226;; Border Security Force Act, 1968 - Sections 14, 16, 17, 40, 46,47, 74, 74(1)(2), 115, 116, 117 and 167(2);; Border Security Force Rules - Rules 51(2), 142(2), 143, 143(2), 145, 147, 148, 149, 157 and 159

Reported in : (1999)2CALLT107(HC)

Admittedly the charges against the petitioner came within the purview of section 16(d) and section 46 of the Border Security Force Act which read thus :--'16. Offences punishable more severely on active duty than at other times--any person subject to … Randhir Singh of this unit has been charged with an Offences under section 16(d) and 40 of BSF Act 1968 committed on 10.3.92 at BOP Bornberia at about 21.30 hrs. left the said picauet without orders from his

Sudesh Kumar Vs. Union of India

Court : Delhi

Subject : Service

Acts : Border Security Force Act, 1968 - Sections 62

Reported in : 1997(42)DRJ623

that disciplinary action would be taken against him. Thereafter a Court of Inquiry under Section 62 of the Border Security Force Act, 1968 was ordered to inquire into the absence of the petitioner, but without awaiting the outcome thereof, it appears … of this HQ. He was given an opportunity to show cause vide this HQL/No. 0124/Estt.I/Leave/92/3029 dated 30 Dec. 92 without any reasonable cause and his further retention in the service is undesirable. I, thereforee, dismiss him from

Universal Music India Ltd. and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Companies Act, 1956 - Sections 4D, 10A to 10D, 79, 111(4), 237, 397, 398, 399, 399(1), 399(2), 399(3), 399(4), 399(5), 401, 402 and 642; Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 33; Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Sections 10; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Sections 86, 92, 92(1) and 92(2); Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 195 and 197; Companies (IInd Amendment) Act, 2003 - Sections 44; Constitution of India - Article 226; Army Act, 1950 - Sections 19; Army Rules, 1954 - Rule 14; Land Acquisition Act - Sections 17(4); Foreign Exchange Regulation Act; Electricity Act, 1910 - Sections 4(1); Border Security Force Act, 1968; Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 1949; Minimum Wages Act, 1948 - Sections 5(1); Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Sections 11, 11(4),

Reported in : [2008]87SCL51(Delhi)

and legislative intent, the Apex Court held that the authority which disposed of a post-confirmation petition under the Border Security Force Act, 1968 and rules framed there under is not a court and every order passed administratively cannot be subjected to … statutory provision.10. It was lastly urged that so far as several comparable statutory provisions which inter alia, include, Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure; Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947; Section 197 of the

Assadullah Khan Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Jammu and Kashmir

Subject : Service

Acts : Border Security Force Act, 1968 - Section 62; ; Border Security Force Rules, 1969 - Rule 173(8)

Reported in : 2004(3)JKJ178

the dismissal order. According to the appellant, he was denied due opportunity of hearing as provided in the Border Security Force Act, 1968 and the Border Security Force Rules, 1969 framed thereunder. The order being in violation of the statutory rules … of the Commandant to pass the impugned order.5. On behalf of the respondents, it was submitted that under Section 62 of the BSF Act, it is mandatory to hold court of inquiry in all cases of unauthorized

Sub.inspector Gurbachan Singh Vs. Uoi and ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

the BSF Act, 1968 to the confirming authority.25. Thereafter the petitioner preferred petition under Section 117(2) of the Border Security Force Act, 1969 to the Director General, BSF, Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt. of India, which petition was rejected vide … detailed to prepare Record of Evidence in respect of the petitioner.17. The petitioner submitted an application under Rule 92 of the BSF Rules, 1969 to the GFSC stating that prosecution has failed to establish a prima-facie case

B.s. Hari Commandant Vs. Union Of India

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Land Acquisition

the Inquiry Report, the appellant was issued charge sheet dated 04.07.1995 under Sections 40 & 46 of the Border Security Force Act, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as the “BSF Act”). However, the charges, as laid aforesaid, were dropped. 38. Thereafter, the … 05.04.1995, the local police conducted a search and a few Jerrycans of Acetic Anhydride, a controlled substance under Section 9A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the “NDPS Act”), were