Advanced Search Results

Bangalore Water Supply and Sewarage Board Vs. Dr. T.K. Puttaswamy Gowd ...

Court : Karnataka

Subject : Service

Acts : Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Act, 1964 - Sections 12, 88 and 88(1); Karnataka Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957 - Rules 2, 8, 9(2), 9(3), 11 and 11(14)

Reported in : ILR1993KAR278; 1993(1)KarLJ122

Advocate for Respondent : Chidanandayya, Adv. for P.V. Setty, Adv.

N.D.V. Bhat, J.1. In this Appeal the appellant has challenged the order dated 8th November 1991 passed in Writ Petition No.2227 on 985.2. In the said Writ Petition the respondent had challenged the order dated 23,2.1984...

Ram Krit Pathak Vs. Kishun Singh and Others

Court : Allahabad

Subject : Education

Advocate for Respondent : C.S.C.; Rajeev Mishra; Sumiti Rani Gupta; V.K. Singh, Advs

1. Order on the Application No.107701 of 2011 The present appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 29th March, 2011 passed by the learned Single Judge along with an application seeking leave to...

Ram Sahay Yadav Vs. State of U.P. and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Subject : Service

Acts : Urban Land Ceiling Act; Service Rules

Reported in : 2005(3)ESC2026

Advocate for Respondent : C.S.C.

N.K. Mehrotra, J.1. This is a petition for issuing a writ of certiorari quashing the impugned charge-sheet dated 22/25/1.2005 and the suspension order of the same date as contained in Annexure-1 to the writ petition.2. The...

Nazeer Ahmad Vs. State of U.P. and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Subject : Service

Acts : Service Rules

Reported in : 2005(3)ESC2037

Advocate for Respondent : C.S.C.

N.K. Mehrotra, J.1. This is a petition for issuing a writ of certiorari quashing the impugned charge-sheet dated 22/25.1.2005 as contained in Annexure 9-A to the writ petition and the suspension order of the same date...

Sangram Singh S/O Suresh Suryawanshi Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Constitution

Acts : Constitution of India - Articles 14, 15, 15(1) and 15(4)

Reported in : 2004(4)MhLj940

Advocate for Respondent : V.D. Sapkal, Asstt. Government Pleader for respondent No. 1 and 2

B.H. Marlapalle, J.1. In the case of State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors. v. Pradip Tandon and Ors., : [1975]2SCR761 , the Supreme Court held that the reservation in favour of candidates from rural areas is...

Dharam Dev Mehta Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Service

Acts : C.C.S. (C.C.A.) Rules, 1965 - Rules 2 and 56

Reported in : AIR1980SC557; 1980LabIC383; (1980)2SCC205; [1980]2SCR554; 1980(12)LC293(SC)

Advocate for Respondent : D. Mookerjee and ; A. Subhashini, Advs.

V.R. Krishna Iyer, J.1. This appeal by special leave raises a short question as to whether the appellant, who was retired under Rule 56(j) of the Fundamental Rules was so retired by a competent authority contemplated...

Shri Ramendra Kishore Biswas Vs. the State of Tripura and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Service

Acts : C.C.S. (C.C. & A.) Rules, 1965 - Rule 24; Service Rules; Specific Relief Act, 1963 - Sections 34

Reported in : 1998IXAD(SC)225; AIR1999SC294; 1999(1)CTC28; [1999(81)FLR398]; JT1998(8)SC402; 1999LabIC178; (1999)IILLJ192SC; (1999)IMLJ138(SC); 1998(6)SCALE454; (1999)1SCC472; [1998]Supp

1. Leave granted.2. The appellant was proceeded against Departmentally when the Inquiry Officer found him guilty of the charges framed against him and submitted his report dated 17th November, 1992 to the Disciplinary Authority. After issuance...

Commissioners for the Port of Calcutta and anr. Vs. Baleswar Singh

Court : Kolkata

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Calcutta Port Act, 1890 - Sections 4, 30, 31 and 32(1); ;Constitution of India - Article 311(2); ;Central Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules - Section 18

Reported in : AIR1968Cal206,71CWN786,(1969)IILLJ640Cal

Advocate for Respondent : A.P. Chatterjee, Adv.

Sinha, C.J. 1. The facts in this case are shortly as follows: The respondent in this case was at all material time employed as a sub-gunner by the Port Commissioners, a statutory body formed under the...

Lombardi Engineering Limited Vs. Uttarakhand Jal Vidyut Nigam Limited

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Arbitration

REPORTABLE2023INSC976IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION ARBITRATION PETITION No.43 OF2022LOMBARDI ENGINEERING LIMITED …PETITIONER(S) VERSUS UTTARAKHAND JAL VIDYUT NIGAM LIMITED …RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT J.B. PARDIWALA, J.:1. This is a petition under Section 11(6) of the...

V. Ramesh and ors. Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by Its Secret ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Subject : ServiceConstitution

Acts : Andhra Pradesh Law Officers (Recruitment, Conditions of Service and Remuneration) Rules, 1967; Constitution of India - Articles 14, 16(1), 16(4), 46, 166, 166(1), 166(2), 167, 309 and 335 ; Andhra Pradesh State and Subordinate Service Rules - Rule 22

Reported in : 1994(3)ALT41

Advocate for Respondent : Adv. General, ;G.P. for Home and ;Koka Raghava Rao and ;A. Gopal Reddy, Advs.

ORDERK.M. Agarwal, J.1. In all these petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution, a common prayer has been made for quashing the repeal of Andhra Pradesh Law Officers (Recruitment, Conditions of Service and Remuneration) Rules, 1967,...