Delhi Court January 2014 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.
A.K. Malik and Others Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi (Through: the Chief Se ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Jan-09-2014
Common Order: V. Ajay Kumar, Member (J): 1. The date of promotion and seniority in the cadre of Station Officer, a Group `B Gazetted Post in the Delhi Fire Service in GNCTD is in question in all these OAs. Since common question of law is involved, all these OAs are disposed of by way of this common order. 2. The method of recruitment and qualification for appointment to the post of Station Officer in the office of Delhi Fire Service, Govt. of NCT of Delhi are governed by the Rules issued under Article 309 of the Constitution of India, Vide Notification dated 26.10.1998. As per the said Rules, 50% of the Station Officer posts shall be filled up by promotion, failing which by direct recruitment and 50% posts by direct recruitment. 3. The applicants in OA No.2757/2011, while working as Sub-Officers, were directly recruited as Station Officers, under 50% Direct Recruitment Quota and their dates of joining as Station Officers is as follows:- Applicant No.Date of Joining as Station Officer12...
M/S. J.L. Autoparts Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Cce, Delhi-iv
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Jan-09-2014
Archana Wadhwa, J. 1. As per facts on record the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of auto parts falling under heading 8714 of the Central Excise Tariff Act. The dispute in the present appeal relates to the cenvat credit of Rs. 1,87,999/- on the MS Tubes received by the appellant during the period February and March 2009 from a second stage dealer M/s Arvind Enterprises under the cover of its invoices. The said second stage dealer has received the goods from M/s Shree Ganesh Enterprises, the first stage dealer and the goods stands manufactured by one M/s National Steel Tubes. 2. The Revenue Officers conducted investigation against M/s National Steel Tubes as also against M/s Shree Ganesh Enterprises. They recorded the statement of Smt. Kamlesh Devi, Prop. of M/s National Steel Tubes on 22-23.01.2007 who deposed that their firm was not operative since the death of her husband and she has signed blank invoices and cheques of that firm on the advice of his brother and she has no...
M/S G and S International Vs. Cce, New Delhi
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Jan-09-2014
Ms. Archana Wadhwa, J. 1. After hearing both the sides we find that the appellant exported various varieties of viscos shawls to Dubai, during the period 02.03.2005 to 07.05.2005, vide seven shipping bills, under the claim of DEPB. The total value of the consignment declared by the appellant was to the tune of Rs.3,31,59,209/- under the claim of the DEPB to the extent of Rs. 23,21,145/-. The Revenue drew samples of the said consignment and conducted market enquiries as regards the valuation of the same. It is seen that the first report was obtained by the Revenue from M/s N. and M. Overseas (India), who vide their various reports dated 01.09.2007 gave his opinion as regards the value of the shawls in question. It was opined by him that viscos jamawar shawls ranging between Rs. 370/- to Rs. 400/-, viscos lurex shawls ranging between Rs. 205/- to Rs. 210/- and viscos bukla cut work shawls ranging between Rs. 240/- to Rs. 250/-. Inasmuch as the value declared by the appellant in resp...
Prem Chand Sharma, New Delhi Vs. Union of India Through Secretary, Dep ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Jan-09-2014
G. George Paracken, Member (J). 1. In this Original Application, the Applicant is challenging the impugned Memorandum No.8/37/2011-Vig.II dated 28.09.2011 informing him that the President (Disciplinary Authority) proposes to take action against him under Rule 16 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965. The statement of imputation of misconduct or misbehaviour on which action was proposed to be taken against him is reproduced as under:- œThis is regarding investigation into a case related to a tender for laying of U/G Cable in Gurgaon, in r/o Est. No.29147 (D(b)/2002-2003 which was finalized vide agreement No. GRG/Plg. Tender/UG Cable laying -02/2002-2003/16 dated 09/05/2003, with M/s S. Kumar Const. Co. New Delhi. The original cost of the tender was limited to Rs.21,21,883. The period of execution of work was from 09/05/2003 to 06/08/2003, extendable for a further period of 3 months. This was a shared work to be got executed by the SDOP-I, II and III in the area of their respective Sub. Div...
Puran, Delhi Vs. the Chairman, New Delhi Municipal Council, New Delhi
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Jan-09-2014
Raj Vir Sharma, Judicial Member 1. This T.A. is directed against the judgment and decree, dated 16.10.2008, passed by the learned Civil Judge, Delhi, in Suit No.716 of 2006 (earlier numbered as Suit No.42 of 1998). The Civil Suit filed by the applicant for declaration and mandatory injunction with regard to regularization of his services as Driver under the respondent-NDMC having been dismissed, RCA No.1 of 2009 was filed in the court of the learned Senior Civil Judge-cum-RC, New Delhi. Consequent upon issuance of notification by the Central Government under Section 14(2) of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, making the respondent-NDMC amenable to the jurisdiction of the Central Administrative Tribunal in relation to service matters, the said RCA No.1 of 2009 was transferred to this Tribunal under Section 29 of the Act and registered as TA No.1465 of 2009. A Division Bench of this Tribunal, vide order dated 28.10.2009, while deciding the T.A. in favour of the applicant and setting...
A.K. Malik, New Delhi and Others Vs. Sanjay Kumar Tomar, New Delhi and ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Jan-09-2014
Common Order V. Ajay Kumar, Member (J): 1. The date of promotion and seniority in the cadre of Station Officer, a Group `B Gazetted Post in the Delhi Fire Service in GNCTD is in question in all these OAs. Since common question of law is involved, all these OAs are disposed of by way of this common order. 2. The method of recruitment and qualification for appointment to the post of Station Officer in the office of Delhi Fire Service, Govt. of NCT of Delhi are governed by the Rules issued under Article 309 of the Constitution of India, Vide Notification dated 26.10.1998. As per the said Rules, 50% of the Station Officer posts shall be filled up by promotion, failing which by direct recruitment and 50% posts by direct recruitment. 3. The applicants in OA No.2757/2011, while working as Sub-Officers, were directly recruited as Station Officers, under 50% Direct Recruitment Quota and their dates of joining as Station Officers is as follows:- Applicant No. Date of Joining as Station Officer 1...
Mrs. Angoori Devi, Haryana Vs. Union of India Through the General Mana ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Jan-09-2014
G. George Paracken, Member (J) 1. The grievance of the Applicant is against the Respondents letters dated 12.08.2009 and 12.08.2011 to the extent of charging her penal rent/damage rent w.e.f. 01.04.1990 to 01.07.1998 amounting to Rs.2,22,927/- in respect of Railway Quarter No.T-71, Railway Colony, Rohtak. She has also got a grievance against the Respondents for not releasing the DCRG amount admissible to her after the death of husband. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the Applicant is the widow of late Shri Mokha, a Khalasi who was working with the Respondent-Railways. Lastly, he was posted in the Northern Railway Station, Rohtak. He died while in service on 07.02.1989. Immediately after his death, Applicant sought appointment on compassionate grounds. She has also applied for family pension and other retrial benefits. However, the Respondents insisted that she should produce the succession certificate to claim the aforesaid benefits. During his service period, the Applicants hu...
M/S. Ferro Scrap Nigam Limited Vs. Cce, Raipur
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Jan-09-2014
Archana Wadhwa, J. 1. Both the appeals, one filed by the assessee and other filed by the Revenue are being disposed of by a common order as the issue involved is identical. The appellants, under a contract with M/s Bhilai Steel Plants are providing certain services to them, which according to the Revenue are Cargo Handling Services and the assessee is required to discharge service tax on the same. 2. It is seen that vide an earlier order dated 14th February, 2008, the Adjudicating Authority confirmed the demand of Rs. 72,51,113/-. However, the second show cause notice issued for the subsequent period for recovery of service tax to the tune of Rs. 7.21 crores approximately stands dropped by the Commissioner by relying upon the Tribunal judgment in the case of Modi Construction Co. vs. CCE, Ranchi reported in 2008 (13) S.T.R. 34 (Tri. Kolkata). Revenue is in appeal against the said order. 3. We first take up the Revenues appeal in as much as the fate of the assessees appeal is dependent ...
Vistar Constructions (P) Ltd Vs. Uoi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-09-2014
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:09. 01.2014 W.P.(C) 1342/2008 YFC PROJECTS P.LTD. ..... Petitioner versus UOI ..... Respondent W.P.(C) 859/2008 G.D.BUILDTECH P.LTD. ..... Petitioner versus UOI ..... Respondent W.P.(C) 4116/2008 VISTAR CONSTRUCTIONS (P) LTD ..... Petitioner versus UOI ..... Respondent W.P.(C) 6058/2008 SKYLINE ENGINEERING CONTRACTS (INDIA)(P) LTD ..... Petitioner versus UOI & ORS ..... Respondents W.P.(C) 6803/2013 NATIONAL BUILDING CONSTRUCTION CIROIRATUIB KUNUTED (NBCC) ..... Petitioner versus UOI & ANR WP(C) 1342/2008 & Ors. Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr J.K. Mittal with Mr Varun Gaba. For the Respondents : Mr Rajeeve Mehra, ASG with Mr Mukesh Anand, Standing Counsel, Ms Anjana Gosain and Mr Ashish Virmani for R-1/UOI in these writ petitions. Ms Sonia Sharma with Mr Sonakshi Dhiman for R-2 in WP(C) Nos.6058/2008 & 6803/2013. CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT...
Skyline Engineering Contracts (India)(P) Ltd Vs. Uoi and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-09-2014
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:09. 01.2014 W.P.(C) 1342/2008 YFC PROJECTS P.LTD. ..... Petitioner versus UOI ..... Respondent W.P.(C) 859/2008 G.D.BUILDTECH P.LTD. ..... Petitioner versus UOI ..... Respondent W.P.(C) 4116/2008 VISTAR CONSTRUCTIONS (P) LTD ..... Petitioner versus UOI ..... Respondent W.P.(C) 6058/2008 SKYLINE ENGINEERING CONTRACTS (INDIA)(P) LTD ..... Petitioner versus UOI & ORS ..... Respondents W.P.(C) 6803/2013 NATIONAL BUILDING CONSTRUCTION CIROIRATUIB KUNUTED (NBCC) ..... Petitioner versus UOI & ANR WP(C) 1342/2008 & Ors. Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr J.K. Mittal with Mr Varun Gaba. For the Respondents : Mr Rajeeve Mehra, ASG with Mr Mukesh Anand, Standing Counsel, Ms Anjana Gosain and Mr Ashish Virmani for R-1/UOI in these writ petitions. Ms Sonia Sharma with Mr Sonakshi Dhiman for R-2 in WP(C) Nos.6058/2008 & 6803/2013. CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT...
- ‹ Prev
- 51
- 52
- 53
- 54
- 55
- 57
- 58
- 59
- 60
- 61
- Next ›
- Last »