Advanced Search Results

Md. Abdul Samad Vs. General Manager, South Central Railway and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Subject : Service

Acts : Railway Servants (Pension) Rules, 1963 - Rules 13(1), 44 and 65; Manual of Railway Pension Rules, 1950; Railway Services (Pension) Rules, 1993 - Rule 65 and 65(1); Disciplinary and Appeal Rules; Constitution of India - Article 226

Reported in : 2007(3)ALD722; 2007(4)ALT90; 2008(2)SLJ102(NULL)

Advocate for Appellant : Siva, Adv.

ORDERRamesh Ranganathan, J.1. Aggrieved by the order of the 3rd respondent dated 28-6-2000, whereby the petitioner's request for sanction of compassionate allowance was rejected, the present writ petition is filed.2. The petitioner was appointed as a...

Dr. Giridhar Kamalpurkar Vs. Dr. Venugopal Ram Rao and Others

Court : Karnataka

Subject : Service

Acts : Sri Jayadeva Institute of Cardiology Memorandum of Association, 1983 - Clause 3(23); Sri Jayadeva Institute of Cardiology Rules and Regulations, 1983 - Rules 10(4), 12, 18(1) and 19; Sri Jayadeva Institute of Cardiology (Pay, Recruitments, Conditions of Services and Miscellaneous Provisions) Rules, 1987 - Rules 2, 3(6), 7 and 15; Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960 - Sections 6, 8, 9 and 10; Constitution of India - Article 12; Karnataka Medical Services (Teaching and Technical Personnel in Medical and Dental Colleges) Recruitment Rules - 1964

Reported in : 2001(3)KarLJ467

Advocate for Appellant : Sri S. Vijaya Shankar and ;Sri U.L. Bhat, Sr. Advs., ;Sri K. Srinivasa Gowda, Additional Government Adv., ;Sri S.M. Chandrashekar, ;Sri P.R. Ramesh, ;Sri P.N. Kathavi, and ;Sri K. Gopal Hegde, A

1. The controversies, contentions and claims raised in these writ appeals and connected writ petitions/appeals centres around three service cadres of Sri Jayadeva Institute of Cardiology (in short the 'Institute'). These cadres are of (i) Assistant...

B.D.K. Process Controls Private Ltd. and anr. Vs. Bharatiya Mazdoor Sa ...

Court : Karnataka

Subject : Labour and Industrial

Acts : Companies Act; Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 - Sections 33, 33A, 33(1) and 33(2) ; Payment of Wages Act

Reported in : [2006(108)FLR306]; ILR2005KAR5110; (2006)IILLJ151Kant

Advocate for Appellant : S. Vijaya Shankar, Sr. Adv. and ;C.K. Subramanya, Adv.

P. Vishwanatha Shetty, J.1. In this appeal, the appellants have called in question the correctness of the order dated 29th August 2001 made in W.P.Nos. 25578-79/2000 by the learned Single Judge wherein he has confirmed the...

Goetze (India) Ltd. Rep. by Chief General Manager, Mr. Lodhi and the E ...

Court : Karnataka

Subject : Service

Acts : Indian Contract Act - Sections 23; Specific Relief Act, 1963 - Sections 40 and 40(2); Companies Act, 1956; Constitution of India - Articles 12, 14, 16, 16(1) and 21; ITDC Rules - Rule 31; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Order 6, Rule 17; Limitation Act - Schedule - Article 78

Reported in : 2007(4)KarLJ654

Advocate for Appellant : C. Gowri Shankar, ;Girija Shankar and ;B.C. Prahabkhar, Advs.

1. The appellants are before this Court assailing the judgment and decree dated 17.1.2004 passed by the Court of the XXXV Addl. City Civil Judge, Bangalore city in O.S. No. 7383/1999. By the judgment impugned in...

Bhagya Nagar Colony Welfare Association Vs. Government of A.P. and ors ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Subject : Constitution

Acts : Constitution of India - Article 48A

Reported in : 2003(4)ALD74

Advocate for Appellant : V.S.R. Anjaneyulu, Adv. in WP No. 5902 of 1998 and ;K. Venkat Reddy, Adv. in WP No. 1354 of 1998

ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J. 1. The land comprised in Survey Nos. 162, 163, 165 and 167 to 170 of Kukatpally was developed as Bhagyanagar Colony. Layout was approved by the Hdyerabad Urban Development Authority (HUDA) by its...

iksha Shanker Tripathi Vs. State of U.P. and Others

Court : Allahabad

Subject : Service

Acts : Uttar Pradesh Services (C.C.A.) Rules, 1930 - Rules 49A, 49A(1) and (2); Uttar Pradesh Intermediate Education Act, 1921 - Sections 16G(7)

Reported in : 1998(3)AWC1817; [1998(79)FLR870]

Advocate for Appellant : Arun Kumar Gupta and ;Sarita Singh, Advs.

S.R. Singh, J.1. By the order, impugned herein the petitioner has been placed under suspension by the Assistant Commissioner (Khadya Evam Rasad), Gorakhpur Division, Gorakhpur. The suspension has been ordered, inter alia on the charge of...

B. Krishnappa Vs. State of Karnataka

Court : Karnataka

Subject : Property

Acts : Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Sections 4(1) and 6(1)

Reported in : ILR1994KAR962; 1994(2)KarLJ680

Advocate for Appellant : S. Vijay Shankar, Senior Counsel for ;Kaleemulla Shariff and ;B.V. Prabhakar, Advs.

ORDERShivaprakash, J 1. The petitioners were the owners of the lands in question. The said lands were acquired for formation of a residential layout by the 4th respondent Co-operative Society. The possession of the lands has...

The Tata Iron and Steel Company Ltd. Vs. Bihar State Electricity Board ...

Court : Jharkhand

Subject : Electricity

Acts : Companies Act, 1956; Indian Electricity Act, 1910; Constitution of India - Article 12

Reported in : 2009(57)BLJR2421

Advocate for Appellant : Binod Poddar, Sr. Adv.,; Anubha Rawat Choudhary,; Piyush

ORDERAjit Kumar Sinha, J.1. The present writ petition has been filed by Tata Iron & Steel Company Ltd. for the following reliefs : (a) For quashing the order dated 19.4.2000 relating to the financial year 1972-73...

Purna Investments Ltd. Vs. Southern Steelmet and Alloys Ltd. and ors.

Court : Karnataka

Subject : Company

Acts : Companies Act, 1956 - Sections 397 and 398

Reported in : [1978]48CompCas264(Kar); ILR1977KAR1365; 1977(2)KarLJ266

Advocate for Appellant : Sidhartha Shankar Roy, Adv.

Venkatachalaiah, J. 1. Applicants are the petitioners in Company Petition No. 20 of 1977 and by this application seek certain interlocutory orders.2. Company Petition No. 20 of 1977 has been instituted by the applicants under sections...

Navayuga Engineering Company Ltd. Vs. State of Karnataka and ors

Court : Karnataka

Subject : Sales Tax

Advocate for Appellant : Sri A. Shankar, Adv

ORDER1. The petitioner has raised the challenge to the reassessment order, dated 29.9.2010 (Annexure-K) passed by the respondent No.2 and the consequential demand notice, dated 29.9.2010 (Annexure-L).2. Sri A. Shankar, the learned Counsel for the petitioner...