Delhi Court February 2012 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Dr. Nirmal Chandra Vs. Director General and Secretary (Dare), Indian C ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-09-2012
Dr. Ramesh Chandra Panda, Member (A) 1. Dr. NirmalChandra, Principal Scientist in Vivekananda Parvatiya Krishi Anusandhan Sansthan, Almora (VPKAS in short) of Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) joined the ICAR as Scientist on 29.01.1992 and his services were transferred to VPKAS, Almora as Scientist in Social Science Section on 11.01.1993.There, he got promotion to the grade of Senior Scientist on 22.12.1998 and further promoted as Principal Scientist on 21.12.2006. He was transferred on 16.8.2007 to the National Resource Management Division, later on the said Division was renamed as Crop Production Division (CPD in short). The applicant had the apprehension that the Director of the Institute might not include the discipline of Agricultural Extension to which the applicant belongs as part of the Essential Qualification (EQ) for the post of Head, Crop Production Division. With the said apprehension, he represented through a letter on 06.09.2010 (page 19) stating therein that...
Rajendra Sharma Vs. the Director General, Indian Council of Agricultur ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-09-2012
Dr. Ramesh Chandra Panda, Member (A) 1. This is the 2nd round of litigation by the applicant. Earlier in OA No. 2498/2008, he agitated to the effect that the adverse remarks communicated to him for his Annual Assessment Report (AAR) for the period 01.04.2004 to 20.08.2004 and 31.8.2004 to 31.03.2005 and the overall grading was downgraded by the Reviewing Authority. His grievances were reflected in his representation which were rejected and even his appeal against such a non speaking order was also rejected. At the admission stage, the said OA was decided by the Single Bench of the Tribunal on 19.11.2008. The pertinent part of the order reads as follows:- “The appeals against such rejection of the representations were also considered and replied by Memorandum at pages 15 and 16 after the applicant had taken up the matter under RTI Act. This order also indicates no reasons as to why the case put forward by the applicant, has been considered to be unjustified. Learned counsel for th...
Mohinder Kumar Vs. Dda and Others
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-09-2012
ORAL: M.L. Chauhan, Member (J): 1. Applicant while working as Accountant in HAU-IX was issued a charge-sheet vide Memorandum dated 09.01.2004 (Annexure A-3) on the allegation that during the year 1999-2000 he recommended the revision of cost of flat No.44-S, Cat. I, 2nd floor, Sector 8, Jasola from the current cost of Rs.10,66,500/- to the old cost of Rs.7,77,100/- to facilitate refund for an amount of Rs.2,22,263/- to a fake person in violation of instructions issued vide office order No.HAU-IX/Delay/98/DDA/40-n dated 31.3.99 and also despite the fact that being a closed case, the cost was not to be revised as per VC’s orders dated 7.7.99 in file No.178(404)91/SFS/JL-II thereby caused financial loss to the authority. 2. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations, an enquiry was held and the applicant was found guilty of the charges and he was imposed a penalty of reduction of pay by two stages (equivalent to two increments) with cumulative effect for two years with further stipul...
Krishna Mohan Tiwari Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi and Others
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-09-2012
ORAL: G. George Paracken: 1. The applicant has filed this O.A against the impugned Annexure `A’ order dated 21.04.2011 rejecting his application dated 08.03.2011 and not acceding to his request to step up his pay/notional fixation of his salary with retrospective effect on the ground that similar O.A 3906/2010 ‘Om Singh Vs. GNCTD and O.A 454/2011 Renuka Vs. GNCTD were still pending before this Tribunal for adjudication and, therefore, the matter was sub judice. 2. The facts in the applicant’s case relevant for adjudication are that he joined as a PGT (Political Science) (Male) with the respondents on 29.06.2005.He was initially denied appointment but on successfully filing O.A 3258/2001 before this Tribunal, he was given appointment as well as seniority above his batch mate Shri Pramod Kumar. The applicant’s name appears at Serial No. 1569 and that of his junior Shri Pramod Kumar at Serial No. 1577 in the seniority list issued on 07.04.2011.The respondents fixed...
Cce, Meerut Vs. M/S. Bhel
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-09-2012
Per Ms. Archana Wadhwa, J. 1. Being aggrieved with that part of the impugned order passed by Commissioner(Appeals), vide which he has set aside the penalty, Revenue has filed the present appeal. We have heard Shri R.K. Varma, ld. DR appearing for the Revenue and Shri Rupesh Kumar, ld. Adv. appearing for the respondents. 2. It is seen that the dispute arose in respect of Modvat Credit of duty paid on angles and bars, which were used by the respondents in the construction activities. The above non-availability of Modvat Credit was brought to the notice of the respondents by the Department vide their letter dtd. 24.08.01. The respondents immediately acted upon the same and reversed the credit vide two different entries dtd. 3rd and 11th September, 2001. They also paid the interest on the above amount. 3. Commissioner(Appeals) vide his impugned order held as under :- 14. I have gone through the facts of the case and heard Shri S.K. Dhanda, Consultants and Shri R.K.Arora, Author...
M/S Sks Ispat and Power Ltd Vs. Cce, Raipur
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Feb-09-2012
Per Ms. Archana Wadhwa, J. 1. After appreciating the submissions made by both the sides, we find that the appeal itself can be disposed of at this stage. Accordingly after dispensing with the condition of duties and penalties, we proceed to decide the appeal itself with the consent of both the sides. 2. The major part of the demand stands confirmed against the appellants by denying them the benefit of Modvat Credit of duty paid on the angles, channels etc. on the ground that the same stands used as supporting structures and in view of the declaration of law in the case of Vandana Global, are not eligible Modvatable goods. 3. Ld. Advocate appearing for the appellants has no quarrel with the above proposition of law. However, he submits that the said a small portion of steel items were used as structures and the majority of the same were used for fabrication of capital goods in their factory. Even the Larger Bench decision in the case of Vandana Global allows the Modvat...
Jan Chetna and Another Vs. Ministry of Environment and Forests and Oth ...
Court: National Green Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Feb-09-2012
M/s. Scania Steels and Power Ltd. (formerly known as Sidhi Vinayak Sponge Iron Ltd.) was operating a Sponge Iron Plant in Village Punjipatra, Tehsil Gharghoda, District Raigarh in the State of Chhattisgarh, before 2004 i.e. prior to issuance of EIA Notification, 2006. The production capacity of the said existing unit was 66,000 TPA of Sponge Iron (2 x 100 TPD kilns). The rules which governed at the relevant time did not mandate any need for seeking environment clearance for establishing Sponge Iron Units and as such, no environmental clearance was obtained, for installation of the said unit. 2. In the year, 2008, M/s Scania Steels and Power Ltd. (hereinafter called as Scania for the sake of brevity) applied to the MoEF for expansion of the existing project. It proposed to enhance the production of Sponge Iron from 66,000 TPA to 1,32,000 TPA by adding another unit or 66,000 TPA, install a Steel Melting Shop (Induction Furnace, 3x15 tons) with CCM facility of 1,35,000 TPA capacity, a Fer...
Maharaji Educational Trust and anr Vs. M/S S.G.S Constructions and
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-08-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + O.M.P. 120/2012 and IA Nos. 2411-12/2012 MAHARAJI EDUCATIONAL TRUST and ANR ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. A. Sharan, Senior Advocate with Mr. S. Chandrashekhar and Mr. Somesh Chandra Jha, Advocates. Versus M/S S.G.S CONSTRUCTIONS and DEVELOPERS PVT LTD ..... Respondent AND + ARB.A. 3/2012 and IAs 2408-09/2012 MAHARAJI EDUCATIONAL TRUST and ANR ..... Appellants Through: Mr. A. Sharan, Senior Advocate with Mr. S. Chandrashekhar and Mr. Somesh Chandra Jha, Advocates. Versus S.G.S CONSTRUCTION and DEVELOPERS PVT LTD ..... Respondent CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR ORDER % 08.02.2012.1. Maharaji Educational Trust ('MET') and Dr. P. Mahalingam, its Chairman and Managing Trustee, have filed OMP No.120 of 2012 under O.M.P. 120/2012 and Arb. A. 3/2012 Page 1 of 12 Sections 14 and 15 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ('Act') seeking removal of the sole Arbitrator, who is presently adjudicating the disputes between MET and the Respondent, M/s ...
Meena and ors Vs. Sube Singh and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-08-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: 6th January, 2012 Pronounced on: 8th February, 2012 + MAC.APP. 812/2010 MEENA and ORS. ..... Appellants Through: Mr. Partap Singh Adv. with Mr. Rupender Singh, Adv. versus SUBE SINGH and ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr.Arun Yadav, Advocate for R-2. Mr. Sameer Nandwani, Adv. for R-3. WITH + MAC.APP. 30/2011 RELIANCE GEN INSURANCE CO LTD ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Sameer Nandwani, Advocate versus MEENA and ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr.Pratap Singh, Advocate with Mr.Rupender Singh, Advocate for R-1 to R-4. Mr. Arun Yadav, Advocate for R-6. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P.MITTAL JUDGMENT G. P. MITTAL, J..1. These are two Cross Appeals. MAC APP. 812/2010 has been preferred by the Claimants who are the legal representatives of MAC. APP. 812/2010 and 30/2011 Page 1 of 17 the deceased Balbir Singh for enhancement of compensation of ` 16,42,000/- awarded for his death in an accident which took place on 03.11.2008. In Cross Appeal MA...
Hemant Kumar Sharma Vs. Uoi and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-08-2012
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 8th February, 2012 + W.P.(C) 1347/2011 % HEMANT KUMAR SHARMA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. V. Shekhar, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Abhigya and Ms. Deepakshi Jain, Advs. Versus UOI and ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Jatan Singh, CGSC. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW JUDGMENT RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J..1. The petition impugns: i) the order dated 25.02.2011 of the respondent UOI relieving the petitioner "of his duties and post with immediate effect" as Chairman-cum-Managing Director (CMD) of M/s Satluj Jal Vidyut Nigam Ltd. (SJVNL); ii) the Office Memorandum dated 31.12.2010 of the respondent No.3 Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) recommending initiation of minor penalty proceedings against the petitioner. As a consequence to the said two reliefs, the petition seeks extension of services of the petitioner as CMD of SJVNL upto 31.07.2014, as recommended by the Public Enterprises Selection Board (PESB), without getting influ...
- ‹ Prev
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- Next ›
- Last »