Advanced Search Results

Vikrampuri Co-operative House Building Society Ltd. Vs. Secunderabad C ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Subject : Civil

Acts : Constitution of India - Article 226; Cantonment Act, 2006 - Sections 340 and 343

Reported in : 2007(3)ALD494; 2007(3)ALT192

WPMP Nos. 34100 and 34101 of 2006 filed by the petitioner for interim reliefs are also dismissed. - CANTONMENTS ACT[C.A. No. 41/2006]. Section 346 & Cantonment Fund (Servants Rules, 1937, Rules 13, 14 & 15: [H.L. Gokhale, Ag. … is that effective alternative remedies are available to the petitioner by way of appeal and revision under Sections 340 and 343 of the Cantonment Act, 2006 (for short, 'the Act') and there is no extraordinary reason for

Koppu Satyanarayana Vs. Cantonment Board

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Subject : Property

Acts : Cantonment Act, 2006 - Sections 122, 250 and 340; Cantonment Act, 1924 - Sections 179 and 181; Constitution of India - Article 14

Reported in : 2008(3)ALD443

the objection taken is a tenable objection. The learned Counsel also pointed out to Sections 122, 250 and 340 of the Cantonment Act 2006, in short referred to as 'Act' for the purpose of convenience.4. Heard the … period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. - CANTONMENTS ACT[C.A. No. 41/2006]. Section 346 & Cantonment Fund (Servants Rules, 1937, Rules 13, 14 & 15: [H.L. Gokhale, Ag.

Rohit Gera Vs. Pune Cantonment Board Golibar Maidan and Others

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Land Acquisition

dated 21st May, 2009 issued by respondent No.1 Pune Cantonment Board issued under Section 248 (1) of the Cantonments Act, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as “the said Act” for short), order dated 30th November, 2013 passed in Appeal preferred … “the said Act” for short), order dated 30th November, 2013 passed in Appeal preferred by the petitioner under Section 340 of the said Act and consequent notice dated 12th February, 2014 issued by the Board calling upon 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 … that in the present case also has been exercised by the Chief Executive Officer of the respondent Board. Section 340 of the Act provides that any person aggrieved by any order described in the third column of Schedule

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 … that in the present case also has been exercised by the Chief Executive Officer of the respondent Board. Section 340 of the Act provides that any person aggrieved by any order described in the third column of Schedule

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 … that in the present case also has been exercised by the Chief Executive Officer of the respondent Board. Section 340 of the Act provides that any person aggrieved by any order described in the third column of Schedule

Dr. Rajesh Kapoor vs.delhi Cantonment Board and Anr.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

that addition / alternation / modifications are being carried out unauthorisedly in contravention to the provisions of the Cantonments Act, 2006 (“Act of 2006” in short).3. It was the submission of Mr. Vikas Dhawan, learned counsel for the petitioner … the reason that there is a remedy of appeal provided against the said action of the Board under Section 340 read with Schedule 5 of the Act, and in view of Section 342 during the pendency of the

Sanjeev Bhatiani Vs. Union of India and anr.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Education

No.2/DCB on different dates in respect of the subject premises under Sections 340, 248 and 320 of the Cantonments Act, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), be quashed.3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the … of the respondent No.2/DCB under Section 248 (1) of the Act, the petitioner had preferred separate appeals under Section 340 of the Act before the appellate authority, namely, the Principle Director, Defence Estate, Western Command, Chandigarh.6. Contemporaneously, the

Sanjeev Bhatiani Vs. Chief Executive Officer and anr

Court : Delhi

Subject : Education

The notices thus indicate that despite receiving notice from time to time, the petitioner continued to make construction.3. Section 340 of Cantonment Act, 2006 provides that any person aggrieved by any order described in the third column of … bearing number III/I/2E, Shastri Bazar, Delhi Cantt-10 which is situated in Delhi cantonment area and is therefore governed by the Cantonment Act, 2006. Vide notice … Shastri Bazar, Delhi Cantt-10 which is situated in Delhi cantonment area and is therefore governed by the Cantonment Act, 2006. Vide notice dated 13.7.2012, the Chief Executive Officer of Delhi Cantonment, in exercise of the powers conferred upon

K. Rajyalaxmi Vs. District Treasury Officer and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Subject : Constitution

Acts : Constitution of India - Articles 13(3), 166 and 166(1); General Clauses Act, 1897 - Sections 21

Reported in : 2002(6)ALD764; 2002(6)ALT353

Governor under Article 166 cannot be altered or modified by Circular Memo - impugned CM set aside. - CANTONMENTS ACT[C.A. No. 41/2006]. Section 346 & Cantonment Fund (Servants Rules, 1937, Rules 13, 14 & 15: [H.L. Gokhale, Ag. … teacher, died on 9-1-1967. After the death of her husband, as per Clause 6(ii) in G.O. Ms. No. 340 Finance and Planning (FW.Pen.1) Department, dated 30-12-1982, the petitioner was being paid financial assistance @ Rs. 100/- per