Delhi Court February 2018 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.
Shri Narendra Kumar vs.the State (Govt. Of Nct Delhi) and Anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-12-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI * Date of Order: February 12, 2018 + W.P.(C) 1264/2018 & C.M. 5274-75/2018 1. SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Parimal Kumar, Advocate Versus THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT DELHI) AND ANR. Through: Mr. Harsh Kaushik, Advocate for respondent No.2 ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER (ORAL)... Petitioner claims to be working as Junior Operator with second respondent since the year 2007 and by way of Representations/reminders, petitioner had sought regularization of his service upon completion of eight years of contractual service but to no avail.2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that there is no response to petitioners Legal Notice of 19th July, 2017 (Annexure P-7) sent to second respondent to seek regularization of his service. Learned counsel for petitioner alleges discrimination and points out that similarly placed persons, as petitioner, have been already regularized by respondent No.2- Universit...
Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board vs.jitender Munjal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-12-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI * % + W.P.(C) 606/2016 and C.M. Nos. 2483/2016 (stay) and 2486/2016 Judgment reserved on: Judgment delivered on:12. 02.2018 26.04.2017 (seeking permission to file additional documents) DELHI SUBORDINATE SERVICES SELECTION BOARD ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Gautam Narayan, ASC, Mr.Shatrajit Banerji, Mr Praveen Sharma and Mr. Vivek Naresh, Advocates. JITENDER MUNJAL versus ..... Respondent Through: Mrs. Biji Rajesh for Mr. G. Kant, Advocate for R-1 Mr Naresh Kaushik and Ms Kritika Sharma, Advocates for UPSC. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA JUDGMENT VIPIN SANGHI, J.1. The petitioner Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board (DSSSB) has preferred the present writ petition to assail the order dated 17.12.2014 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (CAT/ Tribunal) in O.A. No.3142/2014. The said Original Application, W.P.(C.) No.606/2016 Page 1 of 23 preferred by the respon...
Rajendra Singh vs.govt. Of Nct of Delhi and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-12-2018
$~55 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 6277/2015 RAJENDRA SINGH ........ Petitioner Date of Judgment :12th February, 2018 Through Mr. Sandeep Srivastava with Mr. Yuvraj Mishra, Advocates. versus CORAM: GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Standing Counsel with Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Advocate for L&B/LAC. Mr. Parvinder Chauhan & Mr. Nitin Jain, Advocates for R-3/DUSIB. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL G.S.SISTANI, J.(ORAL) 1. With consent of the parties, the present writ petition is set down for final hearing and disposal.2. This is a petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India filed by the petitioner seeking a declaration that the acquisition proceedings with respect to land of petitioner comprised in Khasra no.2(4-0), situated in the revenue estate of village Ghevra, Tehsil North West, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the subject land) stands lapsed in view of section 24(2) of Right ...
Sarvesh Kumar vs.state
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-12-2018
$~8 to 11 & 13 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.A. 1141/2014 KALI CHARAN Through: Mr. K. Singhal and Mr. Prasanna, ..... Appellant STATE Advocates. versus ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Radhika Kolluru, APP for State. CRL.A. 1143/2014 & CRL.M.(BAIL) 40/2018 SARVESH KUMAR ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Saurabh Kansal and Ms. Pallavi STATE S. Kansal, Advocates. versus ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Radhika Kolluru, APP for State. CRL.A. 1314/2014 CHANDER BHAN Through: Mr. Sitab Ali Chaudhary Mr.Gufran Ali, Advocates DHCLSC. ..... Appellant and for STATE versus ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Radhika Kolluru, APP for State. CRL.A. 1320/2014 AMIT @ MANGRU ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Rakhi Dubey, Advocate. + + + CRL.A. 1141/2014 and connected matters Page 1 of 24 + STATE BIMLESH versus ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Radhika Kolluru, APP for State. CRL.A. 795/2014 Through: Mr. A.S. Juneja, Advocate. ..... Appellant versus THE STATE OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Radhika Koll...
Paras Nath Singh vs.union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-12-2018
$~16 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 7845/2013 PARAS NATH SINGH UNION OF INDIA Through: versus... Petitioner in person. ........ Petitioner ..... Respondent Through: Mr Ruchir Mishra, Mr Mukesh Kumar Tiwari and Mr Abhishek Rao, Advocates for UOI. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU % ORDER1202.2018 VIBHU BAKHRU, J1 The petitioner has filed the present petition impugning an order dated 04.09.2013 (hereafter the impugned order) passed by the Central Information Commission (hereafter the CIC).2. The petitioner had filed an application dated 06.11.2010 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (hereafter the Act) seeking certain information including the certified copy of a report sent by the then Governor of Karnataka to the Union Home Ministry relating to the political situation in the State of Karanataka and for imposing Presidents Rule in that State. The petitioner had also sought information as to what action had been taken by the Government of India on the said...
Prof Ram Bux Jat vs.indira Gandhi National Open University
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-12-2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 1302/2018 Date of Order: February 12, 2018 ........ Petitioner 1. PROF RAM BUX JAT Through: Mr. Piyush Sharma, Advocate Versus INDIRA GANDHI NATIONAL OPEN UNIVERSITY ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Aly Mirza, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR This is second round of litigation. In the first round of litigation, ORDER (ORAL) vide order of 7th May, 2015 (Annexure P-24), petitioner was permitted to pursue remedy with respondent-University. According to petitioner, a Representation of 29th June, 2015 (Annexure P-27) seeking dearness allowance on pension payable to him since the year 2008, was made to respondent-University.2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that despite reminder of 18th August, 2016 (Annexure P-30) and another reminder of 28th December, 2016 (Annexure P-32), petitioners Representation of 29th June, 2015 (Annexure P-27) has not been decided by respondent-University till date. It is pointed out by petitione...
S B Tripathi vs.sdmc and Anr
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-12-2018
$~81 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + LPA6882016 S B TRIPATHI Date of Judgment:12. h February, 2018 ..... Appellant Through: Appellant in person. versus SDMC & ANR ........ RESPONDENTS for Through: Ms.Mini Pushkarna, Standing Counsel with Mr.Jasmeet Singh, LI, Najafgarh Zone, SDMC and Ms.Vasundhra Nayyar, Advocate respondent no.1/SDMC. Mr.Anjum Javed, Add. Standing Counsel with Mr.Devendra Kumar, Advocate for respondent/SHO, Police Station-Dwarka. Mr.P.S.Singh, Ms.Annu Singh and Mr.Rajpal Singh, Advocates for respondent no.2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL G.S.SISTANI, J.(ORAL) 1. This appeal assails order dated 05.10.2016 passed in the writ petition and order dated 04.11.2016 passed in a review petition. The appellant is a resident of Om Apartments. LPA-688/2016 Page 1 of 6 2. Aggrieved by the act of the respondents allowing of a Sunday Market by encroaching upon public land i.e. main road from Om Apartments, Sector-14, P...
Paardarshita Public Welfare Foundation (Ngo) vs.commissioner North Del ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-12-2018
$~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 631/2018 % Date of Decision:12th February, 2018 PAARDARSHITA PUBLIC WELFARE FOUNDATION (NGO) ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. versus Nijhawan person). Harkrishan Das (petitioner-in- COMMISSIONER NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Ajjay Aroraa, Standing Counsel with Mr. North Delhi Municipal Corporation. CORAM: HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR JUDGMENT (ORAL) GITA MITTAL, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE1 The issues raised in this petition are pending before the Appellate Tribunal MCD in Case No.1titled Anant Raj Project Ltd. vs. North DMC.2. The writ petitioner has placed the order dated 7th October, 2016 whereby though his application for impleadment has been rejected, the petitioner has been permitted to file documents, if any, and argue the matter at the state of final arguments. W.P.(C) No.631/2018 Pg.1 of 2 3. Therefore, with regard to the issues raised in this petition are ...
Baij Nath Chandok and Anr. Vs.union of India and Ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-12-2018
$~21 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment pronounced on:12. February 2018 + W.P.(C) 1272/2018 BAIJ NATH CHANDOK AND ANR. Through Mr. Awnish Kumar, Adv. ........ Petitioners versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through Mr. P.S. Singh with Mr. Annu Singh and Mr. Rajpal Singh, Advs . for R-1 & 2 CORAM HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.(ORAL) CM No.5330/2018 1. Allowed subject to all just exceptions. W.P.(C) 1272/2018 & CM No.5329/2018 2. Issue notice. Mr. P.S. Singh accepts notice on behalf of respondents no.2 and 3 and says that he does not wish to file a counter affidavit in the matter in view of the fact that the issue is covered by a judgment of another Single Judge of this court, passed in W.P.(C) No.10797/2017, dated 21.12.2017, titled: Jile Singh and Ors. vs. Union of India and Ors. W.P. (C) 1272 /2018 Page 1 of 4 3. Briefly, insofar as this case is concerned the petitioners aver that they were appointed as Directors to the Board of f...
North Delhi Municipal Corporation vs.ashok Saran
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-12-2018
$~47 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + CRL. Rev. P. 304/2016 Judgment delivered on:12. 02.2018 NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ....Petitioner ASHOK SARAN versus ..... Respondent : Mr. Ajjay Aroraa with Mr. Kapil Dutta, Advocates Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner For the Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA Respondent in person. : % ORDER1202.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.(ORAL) CRL. Rev. P. 304/2016 & Crl.M.A.6515/2017 (stay) 1. The petitioner MCD is aggrieved by order dated 09.03.2016, whereby, the Revisional Court has allowed the revision petition filed by the respondent, impugning order dated 10.03.2015 which had dismissed the application of the respondent under Section 471 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as DMC Act). CRL. Rev. P. 304/2016 Page 1 of 4 2. The respondent had filed the subject application contending that the prosecution launched by the Corporation MCD was barred by limitation as i...
- ‹ Prev
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 50
- 51
- 52
- 53
- 54
- Next ›
- Last »