Delhi Court November 2014 Judgments
Narinder Singh Ahuja and ors. Vs. the Secretary, Ministry of Health an ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:13. 10.2014 Pronounced on:03. 11.2014 + W.P.(C) 1741/2014, C.M. NO.3645/2014 NARINDER SINGH AHUJA AND ORS. ..... Petitioners Through: Sh. K. Venkatraman, Advocate. versus THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE AND ORS. ...... Respondents Through: Sh. Ajay Digpaul, CGSC. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT % 1. In these proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioners are aggrieved by an order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) dated 10.01.2014 in OA No.1016/2013. Their application for a direction to continue them in the respondents employment was dismissed by the said impugned order.2. The applicants were aggrieved by the non-extension of their contractual appointment. They complain that the respondents action in discontinuing such contracts is contrary to the decision to appoint all contractual employees for one year at a...
Tag this Judgment!Ratna Sareen Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-2014
$~ 66 (Category-I) IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:03. 11.2014 W.P.(C) 5298/2014 RATNA SAREEN ..... Petitioner versus GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr B.S. Maan, Ms Smita Maan, Mr Vishal Maan For the Respondents : Mr Yeeshu Jain, Ms Jyoti Tyagi Mr Arjun Pant for DDA. CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. By way of this writ petition the petitioner is seeking the benefit of section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the 2013 Act) which came into effect on 01.01.2014. The petitioner, consequently, seeks a declaration that the acquisition proceeding initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the 1894 Act) and in respect of which Award No.1/2007-08 dated 06.08.200...
Tag this Judgment!Sushil Kumar Gupta Vs. Delhi Development Authority and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-2014
$~ 60 (Category-III) * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:03. 11.2014 W.P.(C) 3188/2014 & CM66342014 SUSHIL KUMAR GUPTA .... Petitioner versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ORS. ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr Jasbir Singh Malik For the Respondents : Mr Yeeshu Jain with Ms Jyoti Tyagi for LAC/L&B. Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal for DDA. CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking the benefit of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the 2013 Act) which came into effect on 01.01.2014. A declaration is sought to the effect that the acquisition proceeding initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the 1894 Act) in respect of which Award No.35/81-82...
Tag this Judgment!Mcd and ors. Vs. R.B. Tomar
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-2014
$~11 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % DECIDED ON:03. 11.2014 + W.P. (C) 587/2011 MCD AND ORS. ..... Petitioners Through: Mrs. Biji Rajesh, Advocate. versus R.B. TOMAR ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Jyoti Singh, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Tinu Bajwa, Sh. Amandeep Joshi and Sh. Sameer Sharma, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI S.RAVINDRA BHAT, J.(OPEN COURT) 1. The petitioner, i.e., the MCD claims to be aggrieved by the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) dated 19.11.2009 in T.A. No.1154/2009. That application was preferred by the respondent (hereinafter referred to as the applicant).2. The admitted facts are that the applicant was appointed at Labour Welfare Superintendent on 25.01.1990 and was promoted as Assistant Labour Welfare Officer on ad hoc basis on 27.03.2002. In the meanwhile, claiming to act upon directions of this court in writ proceedings i.e. W.P. No.1842/2004 (Krishan Kumar Awasthi vs. MCD, decided o...
Tag this Judgment!Ms.Shabnam Shamsi Vs. Ms.Farzana Begum
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + C.M.(M) No.296/2014 & C.M.Nos.5494/2014 (Exemption), 5495/2014 (Stay) 03rd November, 2014 % MS.SHABNAM SHAMSI Through versus ..... Petitioner Mr.Vineet Chaudhary, Advocate. MS.FARZANA BEGUM ..... Respondent Mr.Zafar Siddiqui, Advocate. Through HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugns the order of the trial court dated 20.2.2013 by which the trial court struck off the defence of the petitioner/defendant.2. The subject suit is a suit for possession and mesne profits filed by the respondent/landlady against the petitioner/tenant. In the suit for possession and mesne profits, an interim order for payment on account of rent @ Rs.2000/- per month from November, 2009 was passed on 05.4.2010. This order remained uncomplied with and the case of the petitioner/defendant in reply to an application filed for striking off the...
Tag this Judgment!Shashi Sahni Vs. Union of India and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-2014
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:03. 11.2014 W.P.(C) 5315/2014 & CM105752014 ... Petitioner SHASHI SAHNI versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS ... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr N.P. Sahni For the Respondents : Mr Manish Mohan, CGSC for R-1. Mr Siddharth Panda, Adv. for R-4 (LAC & L&B) Mr Dhanesh Relan, Adv. with Mr Arush Bhandari, Adv. for DDA. CORAM:HONBLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HONBLE MR JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking the benefit of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the 2013 Act) which came into effect on 01.01.2014. The petitioner, consequently seeks a declaration that the acquisition proceeding initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the 1894 Act) and in respect of which...
Tag this Judgment!Sanjeev Kumar Vs. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-2014
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:03. 11.2014 W.P.(C) 5238/2012 & CM107042012 SANJEEV KUMAR ..... Petitioner versus INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. ..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr Kirti Uppal, Sr. Advocate with Mr Badar Mahmood. For the Respondent : Ms Mala Narayan. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU JUDGMENT VIBHU BAKHRU, J1 The present petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the decision dated 16.07.2012 of the Re-evaluation Committee of respondent whereby the re-evaluation of all eligible candidates was carried out and a fresh Merit Panel list was prepared wherein the petitioner was moved from 3rd to 4th position. The petitioner has also challenged the letter dated 07.08.2012 of respondent whereby the above said decision was communicated to the petitioner.2. Brief facts of the case are that respondent issued an advertisement dated 15.10.2010 inviting applications for allotment of dealerships of...
Tag this Judgment!Pratap Singh Vs. State (Govt. of Nct) Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: October 29, 2014 Judgment Delivered on: November 03, 2014 % + CRL.A. 1075/2013 PRATAP SINGH Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.R.K.Anand, Mr.Chetan Anand, Ms.Payal Juneja and Mr.Parminder Singh, Advocates. versus STATE (GOVT. OF NCT) DELHI ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr.Lovkesh Sawhney, APP for the State with Inspector Pratap Singh, present posting Traffic. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA MUKTA GUPTA, J.1. Pratap Singh assails the judgment dated April 22, 2013 convicting him for the offence punishable under Sections 302/201/506 IPC and the order on sentence dated April 26, 2013 directing him to undergo imprisonment for life and fine of `10,000/- for offence punishable under Section 302 IPC, rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and a fine of `2,000/- for offence punishable under Section 201 IPC and rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and a fine of `1,00...
Tag this Judgment!Badami Devi and ors. Vs. Sanjay Khandelwal and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CM(M) No.1080/2013 3rd November , 2014 % BADAMI DEVI & ORS. Through: ......Petitioners Mr. Anuroop P.S.Advocate. VERSUS SANJAY KHANDELWAL & ANR. Through: ...... Respondents Mr. Ujjawal Jha and Mr. Boony Laishram, Adv. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugns the order passed by the trial court dated 6.8.2013 by which the trial court has rejected the prayer of the petitioners/plaintiffs for sending further admitted documents to FSL as was demanded by FSL in order to prepare the report.2. On 4.4.2011, the trial court passed the following order referring the issue of signatures of the parties to FSL and for giving its report:1. An application under Section 45, Indian Evidence Act, filed by the plaintiff is pending disposal. By way of the application, plaintiff has prayed that the signatures of defendant no.1 ...
Tag this Judgment!Suresh Pahwa and anr Vs. Union of India and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-03-2014
$~ 59 (Category-I) IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:03. 11.2014 W.P.(C) 4914/2014 & CM98362014 SURESH PAHWA AND ANR ..... Petitioners versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr Sumit Bansal, Mr Ateev Mathur, Ms Richa Oberoi. For the Respondents : Mr Yeeshu Jain with Ms Jyoti Tyagi for LAC (L&B) Mr Arjun Pant for DDA. CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. By way of this writ petition the petitioners are seeking the benefit of section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the 2013 Act) which came into effect on 01.01.2014. The petitioners, consequently, seek a declaration that the acquisition proceeding initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the 1894 Act) and in respect...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 124
- 125
- 126
- 127
- 128
- 129
- 130
- 131
- 132
- 134
- Next ›
- Last »