Delhi Court July 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.
Hari Ram Shukla and ors. Vs. Uoi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-03-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : July 03, 2013 + W.P.(C) 9981/2009 HARI RAM SHUKLA & ORS. .....Petitioners Represented by: Mr.T.D.Yadav, Advocate versus UOI & ORS. Represented by: ..... Respondents None CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.KAMESWAR RAO PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. The petitioners are blind persons. They are skilled workman. They are experts in the trade of weaving cane furniture. Appointed in the Ministry of Defence on various dates they were placed in the pay scale applicable to semi-skilled workman which we note was in the pay scale `210-290 when the recommendations of the 3rd Pay Commission were in force; replacement scale became `800-1150 when the 4th Pay Commissions recommendations were implemented. The applicable pay scale for skilled workman being `260-400 and `950-1500 respectively. Being blind and hence not being able to socialize with their brethren and not being aware that skilled workman required to be ...
State of Nct of Delhi Vs. Naveen
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-03-2013
$-13 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON :3. d JULY, 2013 + CRL.L.P. 242/2013 STATE OF NCT OF DELHI Through : ..... Petitioner Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP. versus NAVEEN ..... Respondent Through : None. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.Garg, J.(Open Court) 1. State has preferred Criminal Leave Petition under Section 378 (4) Cr.P.C. to file appeal against judgment / order dated 08.07.2011 of learned Metropolitan Magistrate by which the complaint case filed under Section 22A of Minimum Wages Act, 1948 was dismissed for nonprosecution. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and have examined the record. Trial Court record reveals that complaint case under Section 22A of Minimum Wages Act, 1948 was filed by complainant/ Inspector- Joginder Singh against the respondent on 18.12.2009. Vide order dated 22.12.2009, the learned Metropolitan Magistrate summoned the respondent for 09.03.2010. On 09.03.2010, none appeared on behalf of the complainant before the Court. Co...
State of Nct of Delhi Vs. Shyam
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-03-2013
$-13 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON :3. d JULY, 2013 + CRL.L.P. 238/2013 STATE OF NCT OF DELHI Through : ..... Petitioner Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP. versus SHYAM ..... Respondent Through : None. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.Garg, J.(Open Court) 1. State has preferred Criminal Leave Petition under Section 378 (4) Cr.P.C. to file appeal against judgment / order dated 08.07.2011 of learned Metropolitan Magistrate by which the complaint case filed under Section 22A of Minimum Wages Act, 1948 was dismissed for nonprosecution. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and have examined the record. Trial Court record reveals that complaint case under Section 22A of Minimum Wages Act, 1948 was filed by complainant/ Inspector- Joginder Singh against the respondent on 18.12.2009. Vide order dated 22.12.2009, the learned Metropolitan Magistrate summoned the respondent for 09.03.2010. On 09.03.2010, none appeared on behalf of the complainant before the Court. Cou...
Commissioner of Police Vs. Vikram Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-03-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision July 03, 2013 + W.P.(C) 1869/2007 COMMISSIONER OF POLICE ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr.V.K.Tandon, Advocate with Mr.Yogesh Saini, Advocate versus VIKRAM SINGH Represented by: ..... Respondent Mr.Gyanendra Singh, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.(ORAL) CM No.6807/2013 Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that if learned counsel for the respondent is prepared to argue the writ petition today itself early hearing as prayed for may be allowed. Learned counsel for the respondent who has moved the application seeking early hearing says that he is prepared to argue the writ petition today itself. Accordingly, the application is allowed. WP(C) 1869/2007 1. Undisputedly the respondent was an accused in two FIRs registered at PS Doghat, District Meerut, U.P. In both FIRs, registered in the year 1995, pertaining to two incidents, he was named as an ...
O.P. Tiwari Vs. Uoi and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-03-2013
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: July 03, 2013 + W.P.(C) 16760/2004 O.P.TIWARI .... Petitioner Represented by:Mr.J.M.Khanna and Mr.T.N.Bhat, Advocates versus UOI & ANR. ..... Respondents Represented by:Mr.Archana Gaur, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.KAMESWAR RAO V.KAMESWAR RAO, J.(Oral) 1. The challenge in the writ petition is to the order dated October 14, 2013 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (the Tribunal) in OA No.1456/2003 and order dated December 04, 2013 in Review Application No.359/2003 in O.A. No.1456/2003 whereby the Tribunal has disposed of the Original Application with a direction to the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner in the light of the decision of the Tribunal in O.A.No.324/1997 as per his seniority subject to his suitability and availability of posts in Group D and WP(C) 16760/2004 petitioner.2. The brief facts are that the petitioner was engaged as a casual worke...
State of Nct of Delhi Vs. Kulvinder Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-03-2013
$-13 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DECIDED ON :3. d JULY, 2013 + CRL.L.P. 240/2013 STATE OF NCT OF DELHI Through : ..... Petitioner Mr.M.N.Dudeja, APP. versus KULVINDER SINGH Through : ..... Respondent None. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.Garg, J.(Open Court) 1. State has preferred Criminal Leave Petition under Section 378 (4) Cr.P.C. to file appeal against judgment / order dated 08.07.2011 of learned Metropolitan Magistrate by which the complaint case filed under Section 22A of Minimum Wages Act, 1948 was dismissed for nonprosecution. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and have examined the record. Trial Court record reveals that complaint case under Section 22A of Minimum Wages Act, 1948 was filed by complainant/ Inspector- Joginder Singh against the respondent on 18.12.2009. Vide order dated 22.12.2009, the learned Metropolitan Magistrate summoned the respondent for 09.03.2010. On 09.03.2010, none appeared on behalf of the complainant before the ...
Saroj Devi Vs. Union of India and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-03-2013
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) No.2557/2013 Date of decision:3. d July, 2013 % SAROJ DEVI ..... Petitioner Through Mr.Akhilesh Arora, Adv. versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR Through ..... Respondents Mr.Amrit Pal Singh, CGSC with Mr.Gurjinder Kaur, Adv. & Mr.R. Jayaram, AC/CISF CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE GITA MITTAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA GITA MITTAL, J (ORAL) 1. Learned counsel for the respondents has handed over a copy of the communication dated 28th June, 2013 whereby the respondents have communicated the recalculation and re-fixation of the pension which is found admissible to Smt. Saroj Devi, widow of Late Shri Chamru Oraon. Learned Standing Counsel for the Central Government has also handed over a copy of communication dated 21st June, 2013 received by him from the Directorate General of the Central Industrial Security Force in order to explain the circumstances in which the delay occurred in making payment of the extraordinary pension to the petitioner...
Ex.Constable QamaruddIn Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-03-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Reserved on: July 01, 2013 Judgment Pronounced on: July 03, 2013 + W.P.(C) 3995/2011 EX.CONSTABLE QAMARUDDIN .....Petitioner Represented by: Mr.Shankar Raju, Advocate versus GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.Gautam Gupta, Advocate with Mr.Aditya Madan, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE V.KAMESWAR RAO PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. The Summary of Allegations served upon the petitioner, working at the relevant time as a Constable with the Delhi Police, read as under:It is alleged against Constable Qamaruddin, No.1970/C (PIS No.28820046), while posted at Police Station/Kamla Market left the Police Station and reached at I.G.I. Airport alongwith two persons named Shri Nazir and Irshad Ahmed in a taxi on the night intervening 13/14.7.97 They entered the Departure Transit Hall with the help of Const.Mange Ram, Wireless Operator after taking the delivery of two bundles wrapped ...
Nirupa Berry Vs. M/S Goel Estate and Promoters Pvt. Ltd. and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-03-2013
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:3. d July, 2013 % + CS(OS) 67/2011 NIRUPA BERRY Through: ..... Plaintiff Mr. Ashok Bhasin, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Arav Kapoor, Mr. Sunklan Porwal & Mr. Anubhav Bhasin, Advs. Versus M/S GOEL ESTATE & PROMOTERS PVT. LTD. & ANR. ..... Defendants Through: Mr. S.K. Bhaduri & Ms. Kiran Dharam, Advs. for D-1. CORAM :HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J IA No.340/2011 (of the plaintiff u/O 3.R-1&2 CPC) & IA No.3538/2013 (of the defendants u/O 3.R-4 CPC) 1. Applications, of the plaintiff for interim relief restraining the defendants in this suit for specific performance of Agreement of Sale of immovable property from dispossessing the plaintiff from the property agreed to be sold and from alienating, encumbering or parting with possession of the property, and of the defendants for vacation of the ex parte ad-interim order dated 03.02.2011, are for consideration.2. The suit, as originally filed on 11.01.2011, was not for...
Shri Ram Lal Vs. M/S Air India Ltd
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-03-2013
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 63/2005 % Date of Decision: July 3, 2013 SHRI RAM LAL ..... Petitioner Through: None versus M/S AIR INDIA LTD ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Padma Priya, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL VEENA BIRBAL, J.* 1. By way of this petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner has challenged the award dated 28.9.2004 passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal (herein after referred to as the Tribunal) whereby industrial dispute raised by the petitioner for regularizing his services with the respondent/management has been rejected.2. Briefly, the facts relevant for the disposal of present petition are as under:The case of the petitioner is that he had worked with respondent/management i.e. Air India as Casual Loader w.e.f. September 1981 till 1985 and thereafter he was not allowed to continue in service. He had alleged that he was called in the year 1989 by respondent/management for joining the...
- ‹ Prev
- 56
- 57
- 58
- 59
- 60
- 62
- 63
- 64
- 65
- 66
- Next ›
- Last »