Delhi Court March 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.
Dharamveer Kapoor, Delhi Vs. Gnct of Delhi and Others
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Mar-25-2014
Sudhir Kumar, Member (A): 1. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant on the point of issuance of notice, and on the prayer for Ex-Parte grant of Interim Relief. 2. The facts of this case lie in a very narrow compass. The respondents had issued Vacancy Notice Advertisement No.2/13 dated 25.06.2013 advertising for several posts, including the post of Sr. Scientific Assistant (Biology) Post Code 29/13, for three vacancies, two for Un-reserved and one for OBC. Since this OA concerns only the vacancy at Post Code No.29/13, we may reproduce the relevant portion of the Advertisement as below:- Post Code: 29/13 SR. SCIENTIFIC ASSISTANT (BIOLOGY) In FORENSIC SCIENCE LABORATORY No. of Vacancies: 03 (UR-02, OBC-01) Essential Qualification: Masters degree in Zoology or Botany or Anthropology or Human Biology or Biochemistry or Microbiology or Genetics or Biotechnology or Molecular Biology or Forensic Science with Zoology or Botany or Forensic Science as one of the subject at B.Sc. level from a...
Gurpreet Singh, New Delhi Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi Through and Others
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Mar-25-2014
V. Ajay Kumar, Member (J). 1. Both the aforesaid OAs are filed by the same applicant and the facts are similar and prayers are overlapping and hence, disposed of by way of this common order, as agreed by the counsel for both sides in the respective OAs. Hence, no further orders are necessary, in MA 192/2013 in OA 3805/2012 for tagging in OAs for joint disposal. 2. The applicant was initially appointed as Electrical Overseer on 27.04.1984 in the Labour Department of the Govt. of NCTD. He was promoted as Assistant Electrical Inspector on regular basis on 29.10.2004. He was promoted as Deputy Electrical Inspector on ad hoc basis on 26.08.2008, and on regular basis on 17.03.2009. 3. A complaint was registered against the applicant in the Anti Corruption Branch of the Govt. of NCTD under Section 7/13(1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 vide FIR No.37/10 on 08.10.2010 in respect of grant of Electric Contract License. The applicant was kept under judicial custody for more than 48...
Pawan Kumar, Delhi Vs. Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited, New Delhi
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Mar-25-2014
G. George Paracken, Member (J). 1. This is the second round of litigation by the Applicant. He had earlier approached this Tribunal vide O.A. No.810/2012 with the grievance that he was not given out of turn promotion in terms of Rule 13.2 of MTNL Sports Persons Recruitment Rules, 2001 in spite of the fact that his case has been duly recommended by the Regional Sports and Culture Board (RSCB for short), Wrestling Federation of India (WFI for short) and Executive Director of Respondent-Corporation, MTNL. His further grievance in that OA was that the Respondent-Corporation did not even consider his case. This Tribunal has, therefore, disposed of the aforesaid OA vide order dated 13.03.2012 directing the Respondents to consider and decide his representation and convey the decision to him by reasoned and speaking order within one month. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the Applicant is a renowned Wrestler and he won many medals in different National and International competitions. He...
Man Singh, New Delhi Vs. Union of India Through Secretary, Department ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Mar-25-2014
G. George Paracken, J. 1. The applicant in this Original Application has challenged the orders passed in the inquiry proceedings initiated against him which culminated in the imposition of penalty of reduction to the next lower post in the scale of pay of Rs.9300-34-800 grade pay of Rs.4800 till his retirement. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant was proceed against under Rule 14 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 vide memorandum dated 16.08.2012 for the alleged misconduct committed by him while functioning as Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise, Division-1, Indore during the year 2002-03. The article of charges framed against him were as under:- ARTICLE-I That Shri Man Singh while working as Asstt. Commissioner, Central Excise Division, Indore during 2002, conducted verification of the ground plan, produced by M/s. Ruchi Soya Industries, Mangliagaon (here-in-after referred to as RSIL) for obtaining the Registration for Customs Private Bonded Warehouse (falling under the...
SachIn and Others Vs. the State of Maharashtra, Through Secretary, Mah ...
Court: National Green Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Mar-25-2014
P.B. Oral Order 1. Originally, Applicant - Sachin and others have filed the Writ Petition No.4343 of 2008 in the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad. They sought following reliefs: (J) Appln. No.13(THC) of 2013 2 B. Hold and declare that the impugned Notification dated 27.9.1979 issued by respondent No.1 thereby reserving the entire Karjat Taluka, District Ahmednagar for Great Indian Bustard Sacnturary, is unconstitutional, illegal, arbitrary, violative of Article 14,19(1)(g) and 21 of Constitution of India, hence liable to be quashed and set aside. C. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction in the nature of writ of mandamus thereby directing the respondent No.1 to de-reserve Karjat, Taluka, DIst. Ahmednagar from the limits of the Great Indian Bustard Sanctuary and for that purpose issue necessary orders." F. The Respondent No.1 to take steps to de- reserve Karjat Taluka Dist. Ahmednagar from the limits of the Great Indian...
Santosh Kumar Verma, New Delhi and Another Vs. Kendriya Vidyalaya Sang ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Mar-25-2014
(Oral). G. George Paracken, J. Both these Original Applications are identical and the reliefs sought by the applicants are also identical which are reproduced as under:- (a). Call for the original file(s)/record(s) of the respondents dealing with the case of the applicant and peruse the same; (b). Declare the orders/letters No.110-125/2013-14/KVS/CPF to GPF/S.K. Verma dated 02/2014 (Annexure-A Impugned) as illegal, arbitrary and discriminatory and consequently quash the same (in OA No.1027/2014) (b). Declare the orders/letters No.110-125/2012-2013/KVS/CPF to GPF/VIP dated 25.10.2012 and 110-125/2012-13/KVS/CPF to GPF/VIP dated 19.9.2013 (Annexure-A Colly) Impugned) as illegal, arbitrary and discriminatory and consequently quash the same;(in OA No. 1039/2014. (c). Declare that after joining the services of the respondents as Principal on direct recruitment basis vide Memorandum dated 21.07.1995, the applicant is entitled to be extended the benefits of GPF-cum-Pension scheme with all con...
Constable Sandeep, Delhi Vs. Govt. of Nctd Through the Commissioner of ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Mar-25-2014
A.K. Bhardwaj, Member (J). 1. As can be abridged from the pleadings of the parties and the documents placed on record, on 15.03.2008, FIR No 53/2008 was lodged against the applicant by one Smt. Saroj Devi w/o Mahender Singh resident of H.No.55, Gali Ravidas, Joharipur, Delhi at PS Karawal Nagar u/s 323/324/452/34 IPC. Smt. Saroj, who is about 38 years alleged that on 14.03.2008, at 8 PM when she was present in the house, Pritam Singh alongwith his brother Sandeep (applicant) and Banti entered her house and enquired about Mohinder and questioned his action of beating their childrens. In the said report, the allegation against the applicant is that he along with his two brothers had beaten her, her mother and her children with stick and rod and injured all of them. According to her, when her neighbour Dulichand came to save her his head was also injured. For easy reference, the relevant excerpt of the information reported in the first information is extracted hereinbelow:- Pritam Singh a...
Vidya Laxmi Arya, Ghaziabad, U.P. and Others Vs. the Commissioner, Nor ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Mar-25-2014
A .K. Bhardwaj, Member (J). 1. The substantial controversy arises to be determined in the two Original Applications is, whether the applicants are entitled to the pay scale of Rs.1640-2900 w.e.f. the date they were given Current Duty Charge of the post of Public Health Nurse with consequential benefits. 2. As can be abridged from the pleadings of the parties, the applicants in OA No.987/2013 were appointed as regular œA? Grade Staff Nurse in MCD w.e.f. 26.10.1982, 1.06.1981 and 26.10.1982. They applied for the post of Public Health Nurse (PHN) and were interviewed on 19.11.1987 for direct recruitment. Having qualified the interviews they were offered appointment to the post in terms of letter dated 29.08.1988. As the vacancies of PHN filled up by way of direct recruitment of the applicants belonged to reserve categories (SC and ST), their appointment was considered on Current Duty Charge (CDC) basis. On de-reservation of the vacancies, the applicants were appointed as PHN on regu...
W/Hc Darshana, Delhi Vs. the Commissioner of Police, New Delhi and Oth ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Mar-25-2014
A.K. Bhardwaj, J. 1. As can be gathered from the pleadings of the parties and the documents placed on record as enclosures thereof, a complaint case No.103/2001 was filed by one Mr. Raj Kumar against the applicant alleging therein that she in furtherance of common intention submitted affidavits to Land and Development Officer, Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi claiming that she along with her mother Mrs. Raj Kaushalya (since deceased) were the only surviving legal heirs of deceased Amolok Ram (father) while the complainant (Mr. Raj Kumar) was also the surviving legal heir of the said deceased Amolok Ram being his son from first wife Mrs. Mainwati and because of the aforesaid dishonest or fraudulent representation, the Land and Development Officer mutated property No.20-A, 1/B, Tilak Nagar, New Delhi in their favour. According to the complainant, the applicant cheated Land and Development Officer and caused wrongful loss to him. The Court of Mr. Inderjeet Singh, M.M. vide judgment dated 10.1.20...
Pfizer Products, Inc Vs. R.K. Singh and anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-25-2014
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:25. h March, 2014 % + CS(OS) 3137/2012 PFIZER PRODUCTS, INC THROUGH: Mr.Sahil Sethi, Advocate ..Plaintiff VERSUS R.K. SINGH & ANR THROUGH: None ..Defendants CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SISTANI G.S. SISTANI, J.(Oral) 1. Present suit has been filed by the plaintiff for permanent injunction restraining infringement of trademark, passing off, rendition of accounts, delivery up and damages. Summons were issued in the suit on 19.10.2012, 02.01.2013, 25.02.2013 and on 19.07.2013. The plaintiff is aggrieved by use of the mark VIHAGRA by defendants. Despite service, none appeared on behalf of the defendants and they were accordingly proceeded ex parte on 15.01.2014.2. The plaintiff has filed affidavit by way of evidence of Mr. Samir Kazi (PW1), which is exhibited as Ex. PW-1/A. PW1 has deposed that he holds Power of Attorney from plaintiff in his favour and the same is exhibited as Ex. PW-1/1.3. Mr. Samir Kazi, PW1 has deposed tha...
- ‹ Prev
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- Next ›
- Last »