Advanced Search Results

Rajive Raturi versus Union of India & Ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Land Acquisition

Reported in : [2024]11S.C.R.970; 2024 INSC 858

Government or any establishment wholly or substantially financed by that Government, or a Cantonment Board constituted under the Cantonments Act, 2006 (41 of 2006), the Central Government; (ii) in relation to a State Government or any establishment, wholly or … Articles 14, 19, 21. Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 - ss.2(b), 39, 40-46, 89, 100 - Chapter VI - Right of Persons with Disabilities Rules, 2017 - r.15 - Rules for Accessibility - Scheme of … [2024] 11 S.C.R. 970 : 2024 INSC 858 Rajive Raturi v. Union of India & Ors. (Writ Petition No. 243

Committee of Management Shri Kashi Raj Mahavidyalaya, Aurai and Anothe ...

Court : Allahabad

Subject : Constitution

Acts : Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 - Rule 5; Uttar Pradesh Intermediate Education Act, 1921 - Sections 7, 16-A,16-A(7), 16-B(5) and 16-C; Constitution of India - Articles 124, 136 and 226; Uttar Pradesh Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Sections 10-A and 25-N; Intermediate Education(Amendment) Act, 1958; Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968 - Sections 3(2), 4, 6(1), (2) and (3)

Reported in : AIR1997All99; (1996)3UPLBEC1617

20. Order accordingly. Constitution - education - Section 16A of U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 and Rule 5 Chapter 8 of Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 - whether persons who are in actual control of affairs of institution … cannot bind Court or Tribunal with his finding - Deputy Director cannot be a substitute for Tribunal. - CANTONMENTS ACT[C.A. No. 41/2006]. Section 346 & Cantonment Fund (Servants Rules, 1937, Rules 13, 14 & 15: [H.L. Gokhale, Ag.

Radhey Shyam Vs. the State of U.P. and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Subject : Civil

Acts : Allahabad High Court Rules - Rule 5; Allahabad High Court Orders

Reported in : AIR1971All39

the appeal.8. The appeal is not maintainable. It is, therefore, dismissed. Civil - interlocutory Order - Rule 5 Chapter 8 (Allahabad) Rules of Court, 1952 - an Order granting interim stay in a pending writ petition does not … granting interim stay in a pending writ petition does not amount to 'judgment' and therefore not appealable. - CANTONMENTS ACT[C.A. No. 41/2006]. Section 346 & Cantonment Fund (Servants Rules, 1937, Rules 13, 14 & 15: [H.L. Gokhale, Ag.

Synthetics and Chemicals Ltd. Vs. Ram Asrey Lal and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Subject : Property

Acts : High Court Rules; High Court Orders; Allahabad Rules of Court, 1952 - Rule 5; Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Sections 4, 4(2), 6, 17(4) and 40

Reported in : AIR1967All4

conducted even before notification under Section 4 - such enquiry will not effect scope of Section 4. - CANTONMENTS ACT[C.A. No. 41/2006]. Section 346 & Cantonment Fund (Servants Rules, 1937, Rules 13, 14 & 15: [H.L. Gokhale, Ag. … writ petitions shall stand dismissed with costs (i) Civil - omission to include argument - Rule 5 of Chapter VIII of Part 1 of (Allahabad) Rules of Court, 1952 - any argument which is neither mentioned before … 323 of 1963, Ranjit Singh v State of U. P. decided on 8-10-1963 (All) With these decisions we are in respectful agreement and accordingly hold

Mohd. Sharif and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Subject : Civil

Acts : High Court Rules; High Court Orders; Allahabad Court Rules, 1952 - Rule 5

Reported in : AIR1961All82

lies against Order passed by single bench in exercise of second appeal jurisdiction with no specific declaration. - CANTONMENTS ACT[C.A. No. 41/2006]. Section 346 & Cantonment Fund (Servants Rules, 1937, Rules 13, 14 & 15: [H.L. Gokhale, Ag. … is not maintainable and must fail. It is accordingly dismissed. Civil - High Court Rules and Orders - Chapter VIII Rule 5 of (Allahabad) Rules of Court, 1952 - second appeal before a single bench - jurisdiction … Divisional Board or the State Board. The School Tribunal constituted under Section 8 of the Maharashtra Act cannot entertain appeals filed under Section 9 by

Sunil Kumar Kori and Anr. Vs. Gopal Das Kabra and Ors.Etc.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Election

the interim directions in the said Writ Petitions a substantial number of illegally constructed houses were demolished. The Cantonments Act, 2006 re-enacted the existing Act of 1924 after taking into consideration the recommendations made by the Standing Committee of … unfit him to become an elector or has been sentenced by a Criminal Court for any offence under Chapter IXA of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860): Provided that any disqualification incurred by a person under

Chief Executive Officer, Cantonment Board Vs. Tenzing Gopu Lama and Et ...

Court : Guwahati

Subject : Criminal

the offences are non-cognizable and bailable one. The same offence has been brought under the new enactment, The Cantonments Act, 2006 with the same nature of punishment.7. To resolve the legal controversy, it is also necessary to reproduce Section … Since the Offences were triable under summons procedure, the learned Judicial Magistrate took cognizance of the offence under Chapter XX of Cr.P.C. and proceeded with the cases by way of explaining the substance of accusations to the

Danish Infratech Private Limited Vs. Delhi Cantonment Board

Court : Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, besides seeking declaration that Section 248(1) of the Cantonments Act, 2006 is unconstitutional and ultra vires the scheme of the Constitution of India, also seeks quashing of the notices … of this Court in Sales Tax Bar Association (Regd.) supra was concerned with Sections 30 to 35 under Chapter VI of the Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004 (DVAT Act) and the scheme of which Act also … after the purchase of the property on 30 th October, 2012, on 8th March, 2013 submitted a site plan for sanction of the structure standing

Danish Infratech Private Limited Vs. Delhi Cantonment Board

Court : Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, besides seeking declaration that Section 248(1) of the Cantonments Act, 2006 is unconstitutional and ultra vires the scheme of the Constitution of India, also seeks quashing of the notices … of this Court in Sales Tax Bar Association (Regd.) supra was concerned with Sections 30 to 35 under Chapter VI of the Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004 (DVAT Act) and the scheme of which Act also … after the purchase of the property on 30 th October, 2012, on 8th March, 2013 submitted a site plan for sanction of the structure standing

Danish Infratech Private Limited Vs. Delhi Cantonment Board

Court : Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, besides seeking declaration that Section 248(1) of the Cantonments Act, 2006 is unconstitutional and ultra vires the scheme of the Constitution of India, also seeks quashing of the notices … of this Court in Sales Tax Bar Association (Regd.) supra was concerned with Sections 30 to 35 under Chapter VI of the Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004 (DVAT Act) and the scheme of which Act also … after the purchase of the property on 30 th October, 2012, on 8th March, 2013 submitted a site plan for sanction of the structure standing