Advanced Search Results

Rajesh Agarwal Vs. Union of India and ors

Court : Delhi

Subject : Right to Information

Acts : Cantonments Act, 2006 - Section 57; Right to Information Act (RTI), 2005

order dated 20th February 2009 whereby in exercise of its power to review under Section 57 of the Cantonments Act, 2006 („CA 2006) the Government of India („GOI) in the Ministry of Defence (MoD) (Respondent No.1) set aside a … the observations made by the MOD and has no objection to the revocation/modification of its earlier CBR No. 330 dated 04.01.2008 vide which the subject sanction was accorded. The MOD be informed through the DG DE accordingly."25.

Mohan Mahavar and ors. and Vijay Kumar Mahavar and anr. Vs. Union of I ...

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Subject : Election

Reported in : 2009(1)MPHT407

Jabalpur Cantonment Board.2. The relevant facts briefly are that the Cantonments Act, 1924 was replaced by a new Cantonments Act, 2006 (for short 'the 2006 Act') by Parliament. The 2006 Act was brought into force by notification dated 18-12-2006. … short 'the 2006 Act') by Parliament. The 2006 Act was brought into force by notification dated 18-12-2006. Under Section 31 of the 2006 Act, the Central Government made and notified on 21-8-2007 the Cantonment Electoral Rules, 2007 … Court in Hilla Maneksha Panthaky v. Maneksha Darasha Pathaky AIR 1941 Bom 330, in support of his contention that even persons residing in the Cantonment

Delhi Cantonment Board Vs. Smt. Raj Kumari Sachdeva and ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Education

the Delhi Cantonment Board. Facts 2. The Delhi Cantonment Board is a statutory body constituted under the Cantonment Act, 2006. The employees including the teachers of cantonment schools are governed under the Cantonment Fund Servant Rules (CFS Rules). … (TGT), were appointed as Assistant teachers in the pay scale of Rs 330, on different dates in 1989, as the Schools run by the appellant … OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:28. 11.2013 Pronounced on:15. 01.2014 + LPA No.434/2009 & CM No.2224/2010 DELHI CANTONMENT BOARD …….Appellant Versus SMT. RAJ KUMARI SACHDEVA & ORS. + ……Respondents LPA No.403/2010 & C.M. No.10850/2010 (Stay) DELHI … Administrator which in effect means the Government of NCT of Delhi. By Section 2(e)(ii), “Appropriate Authority” means, in the case of schools recognized by Delhi

Essa @ Anjum Abdul Razak Memon Vs. State of Maharashtra Tr.Stf,cbi Mum ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Land Acquisition

who have proved the injury certificates issued to PW-13 and PW-412 respectively. 330) Gajanan Tare (PW-413) (husband of the deceased Gulab Tare) and Karande (PW-414) … the duty of the court to adopt a harmonious construction by which both the provisions remain operative. (Vide: Cantonment Board, Mhow & Anr. vs. M.P. State Road Transport Corpn., AIR 199.SC 2013.Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. vs. Maddula … that he was arrested 6-7 days after the blasts, hence, the date of arrest should be 19/20.03.1993, but actually he has been shown to be arrested on 30.03.1993 so he was illegally detained by the police. The … as by law established, to strike terror in the people, to alienate sections of the people and to adversely affect the harmony amongst different sections

M/S Indus Towers Limited, Rep by Sri P.Ramakanth, Deputy General Manag ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Subject : Service Tax

Commercial Tax Officer Circle-D, Jaipur v. Rajasthan Electricity Board, Jaipur(1997) 10 SCC 330. The Supreme Court noticed that what is used in distribution of electricity … is no appellate order in this writ petition. The impugned orders impose penalty under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (the ‘CST Act’). The relevant facts are not in dispute and as the writ petitions present a … 1st respondent (the Asst. Commercial Tax Officer, Srinagar Colony Circle, Hyderabad), dated 29.2.2012 imposing penalty for assessment years 2006-07 to 2009-10. There is no appellate order in this writ petition. The impugned orders impose penalty under the … are inter-State. F) The dealer claims that in view of provisions of Sections 8(1) and 8(3)(b) of the CST Act r/w Rule-13 of the CST

Amit Bhandari Vs. State and ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Education

was taken from ACP which is in gross violation of standing order 330 of 2007 issued by the Commissioner of Police. The court hearing was … st July, 2010.5. The petitioner preferred a private complaint bearing Crl. Misc. Application No. 601/2010 before learned JMFC Cantonment, Pune for the illegal raid and harassment conducted by the respondent at Pune due to which his father … writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by the petitioner for taking appropriate punitive action against the respondent for violation of fundamental rights of petitioner under Article 14, 21 and 22 of the … caused to him.2. Factual matrix of the case is:FIR No. 90/2010 under Section 498A/406 IPC dated 10th April, 2010, PS North Rohini was registered on