Skip to content

Mumbai Court October 2015 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.

Oct 01 2015

Subhash Vs. State of Maharashtra – Through the Principal ...

Court: Mumbai Nagpur

Decided on: Oct-01-2015

Oral Judgment: 1. Heard learned advocates for the petitioner, respondent No.1 and respondent No.3. None appeared for respondent No.2. 2. The petitioner is claiming to be the owner of Plot No.116, Sheet No.10B along with the house constructed over it, applied for allotment of a small strip of land bearing Plot No.119/1, Sheet No.10B, admeasuring 30.8 sq.mtrs., which according to him is the government land lying vacant and adjacent to Plot No.116. The Sub-Divisional Officer issued proclamation on or about 2nd June, 1994 and as nobody objected, the Sub-Divisional Officer, after calling the report and after receiving no objection from the Municipal Council, Pandharkawada issued the order dated 10th October, 1997 allotting the strip of land to the petitioner as per the valuation made by the Assistant Director of Town Planning. According to the petitioner, the occupancy price of Rs.10,870/- was deposited and agreement was executed on 10th October, 1997 and possession of Plot No.119/1 was han...


Oct 01 2015

Vijaysingh Vs. Dhanorkar Adhunik Gram Jeevan Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, ...

Court: Mumbai Nagpur

Decided on: Oct-01-2015

Oral Judgment : 1. This petition takes exception to the judgment and order dated 27-6-2008 passed by the School Tribunal, Amravati, dismissing Appeal No.21 of 2006 challenging the termination of the services of the petitioner as a Junior College Teacher by an order dated 18-7-2006, making the termination effective from 19-7-2006, on the basis of the findings recorded by the Enquiry Committee for the alleged acts of misconduct. 2. Undisputedly, the petitioner was a permanent employee and was working as a Junior College Teacher. On 27-2-2006, the chargesheet along with the statement of allegations was issued to the petitioner, containing the charges “ (i) that he utilized the letter pad of the School and prepared the false salary certificate under the forged signature of the Principal, (ii) that he misbehaved with the superiors, (iii) that he tampered with the attendance register of the nonteaching employees, (iv) willful negligence in performing duties, (v) remaining absent withou...


  • Next ›

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial