Delhi Court December 2013 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.
Delhi University and Colleges Standsc Employees Welf Vs. University of ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-06-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.858/2013 6th December, 2013 % DELHI UNIVERSITY AND COLLEGES ST&SC EMPLOYEES WELFARE ASSOCIATION (REGD.) ..... Petitioner Through: Ms. Arunima Dwivedi, Advocate. Versus UNIVERSITY OF DELHI AND ORS. Respondents Through: Mr. Mohinder J.S. Rupal, Advocate. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. Two similar writ petitions were filed. One was W.P.(C) No.180/2013 and the other was the present writ petition being W.P.(C) No.858/2013. Leaving aside slight difference in language, essentially the averments in both the writ petitions were same. Reliefs also claimed in both the writ petitions were same viz of challenge to the advertisement dated 25.8.2012 whereby recruitments were being made by the respondent no.2/college to various posts including group D posts.2. Both the writ petitions were heard together and the main writ petition of the individual Sh. Kedar Nath being ...
Adigear International and ors. Vs. State and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-06-2013
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DATE OF DECISION:06. h DECEMBER, 2013 + CRL.M.C. 3746/2013 ADIGEAR INTERNATIONAL & ORS. ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Nilesh Sawhney, Advocate versus STATE & ANR. Through + ..... Respondent Ms. Kusum Dhalla, APP Mr. Neeraj Kishan Kaul, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Vikramjeet Bakshi and Mr. Rajnish Gaur, Advocates for R-2 CRL.M.C. 3756/2013 ADIGEAR INTERNATIONAL & ORS. ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Nilesh Sawhney, Advocate versus STATE & ANR. Through + ..... Respondent Ms. Kusum Dhalla, APP Mr. Neeraj Kishan Kaul, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Vikramjeet Bakshi and Mr. Rajnish Gaur, Advocates for R-2. CRL.M.C. 3757/2013 ADIGEAR INTERNATIONAL & ORS. ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Nilesh Sawhney, Advocate versus STATE & ANR. Through + ..... Respondent Ms. Kusum Dhalla, APP Mr. Neeraj Kishan Kaul, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Vikramjeet Bakshi and Mr. Rajnish Ga...
Amita Vs. Institute of Home Economics and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-06-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % W.P.(C) No.315/2011 6th December, 2013 AMITA Through: ......Petitioner Mr. Pankaj Sinha and Ms. Nupur Grover, Advocates. VERSUS INSTITUTE OF HOME ECONOMICS & ORS. ...... Respondents Through: Ms. Beenashaw Soni, Adv. for R-1. Mr. Ranjeet Kumar, Adv. for R-2. Mr. Sourik Mukherjee and Mr. Saurabh Banerjee, Advocates for R-3. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. Yes VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. By this writ petition, petitioner seeks directions from this Court for quashing of the appointment made of the respondent no.2- Ms. Sharmila Rathee, an orthopedically handicapped candidate, as Lecturer/Assistant Professor to the post for the Department of Bachelor of Elementary Education in the respondent no.1/Institute of Home Economics. Before me, four grounds are urged on behalf of the petitioner for quashing of the appointment of the respondent no.2. First ground which is urged is in terms of Sections 33 a...
Food Inspector / Food Safety Officer Vs. Dinesh Goswami
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-06-2013
$~12. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.L.P. 705/2013 % Judgment dated 06.12.2013 FOOD INSPECTOR / FOOD SAFETY OFFICER ..... Petitioner Through : Mr.Manoj Ohri, Advocate versus DINESH GOSWAMI Through ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI G.S.SISTANI, J.(ORAL) CRL.M.A.18306/2013 1. Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions.2. Application stands disposed of. CRL.L.P. 705/2013 3. Present leave to appeal petition has been filed under Section 378 (1) Cr.P.C. against the order of acquittal dated 17.11.2012 passed by learned ACMM, Delhi.4. The facts of this case, as noticed by the learned ACMM in the judgment, are as under:1. The present complaint has been filed on 02.08.2005 by the Delhi Administration through FI Sh.D.V. Singh against the above said accused. It is averred in the complaint that on 18.09.2004 at about 12:00 PM, FI D.V. Singh purchased a sample of Dal Urd Dhuli, a food article for analysis from accused Dinesh Goswami from the aforesaid pre...
Food Inspector/Food Safety Officer Vs. Parvinder Malik
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-06-2013
$~20 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.L.P. 703/2013 % Judgment dated 06.12.2013 FOOD INSPECTOR/FOOD SAFETY OFFICER ..... Petitioner Through : Mr.Manoj Ohri, Advocate versus PARVINDER MALIK Through ..... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI G.S.SISTANI, J.(ORAL) CRL.M.A.18302/2013 1. Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions.2. Application stands disposed of. CRL.L.P. 703/2013 3. Present leave to appeal petition has been filed under Section 378 (1) Cr.P.C. against the order of acquittal dated 14.12.2012 passed by learned ACMM, Delhi.4. The facts of this case, as noticed by the learned ACMM in the judgment, are as under:1. The present complaint has been filed on 10.01.2003 by the Delhi Administration through FI Sh. R.P. Singh against the above named accused. It is stated in the complaint that on 10.09.2002 at about 3:10 PM, FI Sh.Pawan Bhatnagar purchased a sample of Dal Arhar, a food article for analysis from accused Parvinder Malik from the aforesaid...
Anjna Sharma and ors. Vs. Shishu Bharti Vidyalaya and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-06-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.682/2013 6th December, 2013 % ANJNA SHARMA AND ORS. Through: ..... Petitioners Mr. Ashok Aggarwal, Advocate. Versus SHISHU BHARTI VIDYALAYA AND ORS. Respondents Through: Mr. C.S. Gupta, Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 2. Ms. Navratan Chaudhary, Advocate for respondent No.3. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. Certain litigants, as also the Advocates representing them, unfortunately play games of hide and seek with the Courts. It is time that Courts come down with very heavy hands on these litigants. I am observing this because this case was listed three days back on 3.12.2013 when arguments were advanced on behalf of respondent no.1/school as to the validity or otherwise of the order of the Director of Education dated 3.7.2012 filed as Annexure P-3 at page 81 of the paper book of this writ petition limited to the aspect of powers of the Director of Educati...
Brig Jacob Thakaran Chako Vs. Uoi and Others
Court: Armed forces Tribunal AFT Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Dec-06-2013
Counter in terms of the directions of the court has not been filed. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that they will file the counter within three days. Rejoinder, if any, be filed within one week thereafter. List the matter on 16th December,2013. Col. S. Prabhu, who is present in the court wants time to seek instructions from the concerned authorities. Learned counsel for the petitioner insists that the promotion of the respondents No.3and 4 should be stayed. However, we are not inclined to do at this stage unless we have examined the stand taken by the respondents. Since the matter is already listed for 16th December,2013, therefore, appropriate order shall be passed on that date. On the last date of hearing Mrs. Gosain Advocate has accepted the notice on behalf of all the respondents. She is not present today. Notice be issued Mrs. Gosain Adv to appear in the case on the next date. Respondents shall also bring all the records of the Promotion Board on the next date of hear...
Govt. of Nct of Delhi and ors. Vs. Deepa Tomar
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-2013
$~2 to 5 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Date of Decision: December 05, 2013 W.P.(C) 4304/2013 COMMISSIONER OF POLICE ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr.V.K.Tandon, Advocate with Mr.Yogesh Saini, Advocate versus PREM SINGH CHOUDHARY ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr.Anil Singal, Advocate W.P.(C) 4308/2013 COMMISSIONER OF POLICE ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr.V.K.Tandon, Advocate with Mr.Yogesh Saini, Advocate versus RAJ KUMAR Represented by: ..... Respondent None W.P.(C) 4315/2013 COMMISSIONER OF POLICE ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr.V.K.Tandon, Advocate with Mr.Yogesh Saini, Advocate versus SHIV SINGH Represented by: W.P.(C) No.4304/2013 & conn.matters ..... Respondent W.P.(C) 4939/2013 GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS ..... Petitioners Represented by: Ms.Avnish Ahlawat, Advocate versus DEEPA TOMAR Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.Sachin Chauhan, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(Oral...
Rakesh JaIn Vs. Suresh Kumar Kohli and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-2013
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CM(M) 880/2012 % Judgment delivered on:5. h December, 2013 RAKESH JAIN ..... Petitioner Through: Mr.Arun Bhardwaj, Senior Advocate with Mr. Pawan S. Bindra, Mr. Amit Bhardwaj, Mr. Karan Yadav and Mr. Karan Bhardwaj, Advocates. Versus SURESH KUMAR KOHLI AND ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr.Prag Chawla, Mr. Sourabh Shokeen and Mr.Sudeep Sudan, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J.1. Vide the present petition, petitioner seeks setting aside of the impugned order dated 08.06.2012 passed in Execution Petition No.51/2012 passed by Additional Rent Controller, whereby objections filed by the petitioner under Section 47 read with Order 21Rule 26 (1) have been rejected.2. He also seeks setting aside of the order dated 30.11.2011 passed by the ld. ARC (Central), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in Eviction Petition No.304/2010, whereby the petition filed by the respondent No.1 under Section 41(1) (e) read with Section 25-B of DR...
Rishan Dhamija Vs. University of Delhi and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision:05. 12.2013 + WP(C) No.7645 of 2013 & CM No.16304 of 2013 RISHAN DHAMIJA Through: Mr. Rajesh Ruchika, Advs. ..... Petitioner Yadav with Ms. versus UNIVERSITY OF DELHI AND ANR Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Mohinder JS Rupal, Adv. for DU CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.JAIN JUDGMENT V.K.JAIN, J.(Oral) The petitioner before this Court is a student of LLB Course in Faculty of Law, University of Delhi, for the academic year 2013-2014. According to the petitioner, he fell ill from 20.8.2013 to 2.9.2013 and being confined to bed, could not attend the classes. This is also the case of the petitioner that during the period August-2013 to November-2013, he was actively involved and participated in a number of moot court competitions and as a result, he could not attend enough number of classes.2. The Attendance Rule of Faculty of Law, as contained in the Admission Brochure, reads as under:All the students of LL.B. shall have to put in m...
- ‹ Prev
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- Next ›
- Last »