Delhi Court April 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 34 of about 432 results (0.021 seconds)Salim Khan Vs. Union of India Through Its Secretary
Court: National Green Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
1. These two applications were registered in the National Green Tribunal, Central Zonal Bench, Bhopal on transfer from the Hon'ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Principal seat at Jabalpur where they were dealt in Writ Petition Nos. 15467/2010 and 7405/2013 and on transfer, they were registered as Original Application Nos. 38/2014 and 34/2014, respectively. Since the issues involved in both the petitions filed before the Hon'ble High Court are identical, these two OAs are taken up together for hearing and decided together. The facts in the present cases in a nutshell are as follows : - 2. Both the Applicants are residents of Village Premtala, Post Bagra, Tehsil Babai, District Hoshangabad, Madhya Pradesh. They claim that they are social workers and environmentalists deeply concerned with the larger public interest especially with reference to the environmental and ecological issues and they strive for protection of environment and forest. They stated that in the year 1980, the State Gov...
Tag this Judgment!Sujan Singh, Bangalore Vs. Government of India Ministry of Home Affair ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
(Oral), Syed Rafat Alam, Chairman, J. 1. At the outset, a preliminary objection is taken on behalf of the respondents about the maintainability of this Application before the Tribunal on the ground that the applicant belongs to the combatized service of Sashastra Seema Bal (SSB) and is working as Assistant Commandant (Medical Officer) and thus, this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain the grievance of the applicant pertaining to his service conditions under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.2. We have heard learned counsel for applicant and respondents and considered the objections raised on behalf of the respondents regarding maintainability of this Application before the Tribunal. This issue has already been dealt with by this very Bench in OA No.2055/2012 with connected OA No.3322/2012 vide order dated 13.09.2013, wherein we have held as under:- "32. No doubt that the post of DIG is a Combatized (GD) post, but the fact remains that this issue has to be consi...
Tag this Judgment!Uttam Singh (Tgt-hindi, Delhi and Others Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi Thr ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Shekhar Agarwal, Member (A). 1. This Review Application has been filed by the applicants of OA-657/2012 for review of our order dated 10.01.2013. This review application has been filed mainly on two grounds each of which is discussed as hereunder:- The first ground taken by the review applicants is that while passing the aforesaid order this Tribunal had lost sight of the manner in which pay fixation was done in the Ministry of Agriculture, which was specifically relied upon by the review applicants. We notice from our judgment that there is no mention of the pay fixation done in the Ministry of Agriculture. It, therefore, appears that there is force in the contention of the review applicants that this issue had escaped our attention while delivering the aforesaid judgment. The second ground taken by the review applicants is that this Tribunal had agreed that anomaly existed in pay fixation of teachers inasmuch as the teachers appointed on or after 01.01.2006 were getting more pay then...
Tag this Judgment!Shirish Barve Vs. the Union of India, Through : the Ministry of Road T ...
Court: National Green Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
1. The Applicants have filed the present Application under Section 14, 15, 17 and 18 of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, basically challenging the proposed Jalgaon bypass road of the National Highway No.6 which has been proposed by Respondent No.2 i.e. National Highway Authority of India (NHAI). The Applicants claim that the present Application has been filed to salvage the high fertile and productive land from the proposed bypass road which is not required and this unnecessary proposal of having a by-pass which would create livelihood problems for (J) Application No.38/2013 2 many farmers and change in land use thereby affecting the environment. 2. The Respondent No.1 is the Ministry of Road Transport and Highway, Government of India, New Delhi which is controlling the National Highways in the country, Respondent No.2 is the National Highway Authority of India (NHAI) which is planning and executing the said project, Respondent No.3 is the Collector of Jalgaon who is acquiring th...
Tag this Judgment!Krbl Ltd. Vs. Pk Overseas Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on: April 04, 2014 + FAO No.520/2011 KRBL LTD. Through: ..... Appellant Mr. S.K.G. Bansal, Mr. Amit Chanchal Jha, Mr. Ajay Amitabh Suman, Mr.Pankaj Kumar & Mr. Santosh Kumar, Advocates Versus PK OVERSEAS PVT. LTD. Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Senior Advocate with Mr. N.K. Manchanda, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR ORDER KAILASH GAMBHIR, J C.M. Appl. No.2992/2012 1. By this application filed under Section 5 of Limitation Act, the applicant seeks condonation of delay of 32 days in filing the accompanying review application. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed and the delay of 32 days in filing the review application is condoned.2. The application stands disposed of. Rev. Pet. No.109/2012 1. By this application moved under Order 47 Rule 1 read with Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as CPC) the appellant/applicant seeks review of th...
Tag this Judgment!Murari Gupta Vs. High Court of Delhi Through Its Registrar General
Court: Delhi
$~5 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:4. h April, 2014 + W.P. (C) 2172/2014 MURARI GUPTA Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. R.K. Saini, Advocate versus HIGH COURT OF DELHI THROUGH ITS REGISTRAR GENERAL AND ANR .... Respondents Through: Mr. Rajiv Bansal, Standing Counsel for DHC. Ms. Vibha Mahajan, Advocate for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL JUDGMENT SANJIV KHANNA J.(ORAL) 1. Respondents have filed status report.2. In order to enable the learned counsel for the petitioner to go through the same, the matter was passed over and has been taken up for hearing in the second round.3. The grievance of the petitioner is that no Delhi Higher Judicial Services (DHJS) Examination for direct recruits were held in the years 2010, 2011 and 2012 and this fact has not been noticed in the Notification dated 29.12.2013. It is accordingly submitted that the petitioner who had appeared in DHJS Examination for direct recruits in 2009, has su...
Tag this Judgment!AllauddIn Vs. State (Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on: April 04, 2014 + CRL.A. 1441/2011 ALLAUDDIN Through: ....Appellant Ms. Anita Abraham, Advocate Versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Sunil Sharma, APP for the State CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA JUDGMENT KAILASH GAMBHIR, J1 Challenge in the present criminal appeal is to the impugned judgment dated 01.06.2011 and order on sentence dated 04.06.2011 whereby the AppellantAllaudin was convicted for committing an offence punishable under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as IPC) and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment along with the payment of fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default thereof to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month.2. In brief the case of the prosecution is as under:- On 10.04.2010, DD No.58A was lodged regarding a person getting stabbed at Murga mandi at PS Kalyan Puri. PW-3, HC Rajesh Kumar reached at t...
Tag this Judgment!Peeyush Agarwal Vs. Sanjiv Bhavnani and ors.
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Reserved on: March 31, 2014 Judgment Delivered on: April 03, 2014 + RFA(OS) 71/2013 PEEYUSH AGARWAL Represented by: ..... Appellant Mr.Sachin Chopra, Advocate with Mr.Anuj Tyagi, Ms.Maitry Kakade and Ms.Noor Nisha, Advocates versus SANJIV BHAVNANI & ORS Represented by: ..... Respondents Mr.Meet Malhotra, Sr.Advocate instructed by Mr.N.P.S.Chawla, Mr.Gaurav Varma, Mr.Karamveer Jindal, Advocates for R-1 Mr.Ravi Gupta, Sr.Advocate instructed by Mr.Kamal Bansal, Advocate for R-2 & 3 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.1. Impleading the first respondent as the sole defendant, the appellant filed a suit praying a declaration to be granted in its favour that 1397150 (Thirteen Lacs Ninety Seven Thousand One Hundred Fifty) shares of the company Vishesh Infotechnics Limited presently in the name and custody of the respondent No.1 be declared to be the shares of the appellant. Permanen...
Tag this Judgment!Jaipal Singh Vs. State
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:03. 04.2014 CRL. A. 752/2010 RAJBIR SINGH ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Hans Raj Singh, Adv. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: + Ms. Ritu Gauba, APP. CRL.A. 753/2010 HARPAL SINGH ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Hans Raj Singh, Adv. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: + Ms. Ritu Gauba, APP. CRL.A. 754/2010 NARENDER SINGH Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Hans Raj Singh, Adv. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Ritu Gauba, APP. CRL. A. 429/2014 JAIPAL SINGH ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Hans Raj Singh, Adv. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Ritu Gauba, APP. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. JAIN JUDGEMENT V.K. JAIN, J.(Oral) On 28.8.2005, on receipt of copy of DD No.45B, Head Constable Shailender Singh of Police Station Saraswati Vihar reached G-Block, Bihari Chowk, Shakurpur, where he came to know that the injured persons had been taken to BJRM Hospital by PCR van. When the aforesaid Head Constable reached the hospit...
Tag this Judgment!Raju Vs. State of Nct of Delhi
Court: Delhi
R-82 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on :28.03.2014 Judgment delivered on :03. 4.2014 CRL.A. 249/2006 RAJU Through: Appellant Mr.Pramod Kumar Dubey, Adv. Versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI .Respondent Through: Ms.Fizani Hussain, APP. CRL.A. 313/2006 PARAS RAM Through: Appellant Mr.Pramod Kumar Dubey, Adv. Versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI .Respondent Through: Ms.Fizani Hussain, APP. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.1 Appellants are aggrieved by the impugned judgment and order of sentence dated 24.12.2005 and 17.02.2006 respectively wherein the appellants had been convicted and sentenced to undergo RI for 7 years for the offence under Section 398 IPC; for the offence under Section 25/54/59 of the Arms Act they had been sentenced to undergo RI for three years. Both the sentences were to run concurrently; benefit of Section 428 Cr.P.C. had been granted to the appellants. 2 Version of the prosecution is that on 10.01.2001 at about 7.00 p.m. in ...
Tag this Judgment!