Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Madras
G. Shanthappa, Member(J)) The above application is filed under section of 19 of Administrative Tribunal's Act 1985 challenging the legality and propriety of the charge memo no .M/ET/OP/150/1/DAR/AR/SF5/2 dated 27.01.2012 by the respondents and to quash the same. 2. We have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties. Senior Counsel Mr. V. Radhakrishnan represented the respondents. 3. The brief facts of the case according to the applicant are: The applicant was driving the train from Chennai Beach to Vellore i.e. MEMU 66017. When the train was running in a normal speed he had seen in the opposite side a train moving from Arakonam to Katpadi and he applied sudden break, the speed could not be controlled. The train dashed the opposite train and he was thrown out from the train and there was an accident. The police registered a case and FIR was filed in Cr. No. 623/2011 under sections 279, 337, 338 and 304(A) of IPC r/w 154 Railway Act at 323, 324, 326 and 304 of IPC. The responde...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Barrett v. United States - 423 U.S. 212 (1976) U.S. Supreme Court Barrett v. United States, 423 U.S. 212 (1976) Barrett v. United States No. 74-5566 Argued November 4, 1975 Decided January 13, 1976 423 U.S. 212 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT Syllabus The provision of the Gun Control Act of 1968, 18 U.S.C. 922(h), making it unlawful for a convicted felon, inter alia, "to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce," held to apply to a convicted felon's intrastate purchase from a retail dealer of a firearm that previously, but independently of the felon's receipt, had been transported in interstate commerce from the manufacturer to a distributor and then from the distributor to the dealer. Pp. 423 U. S. 215 -225. 504 F.2d 629, affirmed. BLACKMUN, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which BURGER, C.J., and BRENNAN, WHITE, MARSHALL, and POWELL, JJ., joined. WHIT...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE/ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.7095 OF2022(ARISING OUT OF SLP (CIVIL) No.5236 OF2022 AISHAT SHIFA .....APPELLANT(S) VERSUS THE STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS. .....RESPONDENT(S) W I T H WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.120 OF2022CIVIL APPEAL No.7075 OF2022(ARISING OUT OF SLP (CIVIL) No.15405 OF2022 CIVIL APPEAL No.6957 OF2022(ARISING OUT OF SLP (CIVIL) No.9217 OF2022 CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 7078-7083 OF2022(ARISING OUT OF SLP (CIVIL) NOS. 15407-15412 OF2022 CIVIL APPEAL No.7077 OF2022(ARISING OUT OF SLP (CIVIL) No.15419 OF2022 CIVIL APPEAL No.7074 OF2022(ARISING OUT OF SLP (CIVIL) No.15403 OF2022 CIVIL APPEAL No.7076 OF2022(ARISING OUT OF SLP (CIVIL) No.15418 OF2022 1 CIVIL APPEAL No.7072 OF2022(ARISING OUT OF SLP (CIVIL) No.11396 OF2022 CIVIL APPEAL No.6934 OF2022(ARISING OUT OF SLP (CIVIL) No.7794 OF2022 CIVIL APPEAL No.7084 OF2022(ARISING OUT OF SLP (CIVIL) No.15402 OF2022 CIVIL APPEAL No.7085 OF2022(ARISING OUT OF SLP (CIVIL) No.15416 OF2...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
NLRB v. Transportation Mgmt. - 462 U.S. 393 (1983) U.S. Supreme Court NLRB v. Transportation Mgmt., 462 U.S. 393 (1983) National Labor Relations Board v. Transportation Management Corp. No. 82-168. Argued March 28, 1983 Decided June 15, 1983 462 U.S. 393 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT Syllabus Acting on unfair labor practice charges filed by an employee of respondent, petitioner National Labor Relations Board found that respondent had discharged the employee, a bus driver, for his union activities, in violation of 8(a)(1) and 8(a)(3) of the National Labor Relations Act. The Board applied its rule that the General Counsel has the burden of persuading the Board by a preponderance of the evidence that an antiunion animus contributed to the employer's decision to discharge the employee, and the employer can avoid the conclusion that it violated the Act by proving by a preponderance of the evidence that the employee would have been fired ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1967Mad303
(1) This application by the plaintiff is to implead Saidapet Annadhana Samajam by its Secretary, C. Bakthavatsalam as second defendant. There is a connected application for consequential amendment of the cause title and the several paragraphs of the plaint. That matter is not now before me as the said application is not stamped or numbered.(2) Applicant-plaintiff's have filed the above suit for a scheme for safeguarding the properties of the aforesaid Samajam and its income, for proper administration of the affairs of the Samajam, for removal of Bhaktavatsalam from all posts which he claims to hold as, according to the plaintiffs, he has committed various acts of breach of trust, for appointment of a Commissioner-cum-Receiver to take inventory and for accounts etc. The plaint is laid under S. 92 C.P.C. and the Advocate General has given consent to the institution of the suit as originally framed wherein C. Bhaktavatsalam is impleaded as the sole defendant.(3) The averments in the plain...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR2001Cal61
ORDERK.J. Sengupta, J.1. By this writ application the petitioners have asked for relief for declaration that they are not liable to pay octroi/ terminal tax in view of the exemption given under para 3(f) of the Port Blair Municipal Council Octroi/Terminal Tax Bye-Laws framed under the Andaman and Nicobar Municipal Regulations, 1994 and the Municipal authorities are not authorised to realise the terminal/octroi tax from the petitioners or their members. A further challenge has been thrown to the notification dated 21st May. 1993, issued by the Lieutenant Governor for realising of octroi/terminal tax from the petitioners in exercise of his power under Section 71(6) of the Andman and Nicobar Islands (Municipal Boards) Regulation, 1957, contending the same being ultra vires and unconstitutional. The writ-petitioners have also prayed for further relief for refund of the terminal/octroi tax in so far as the S.S. 1, Units are concerned and the units at Port Blair within the jurlsdictlon of Mu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.23259 of 2011 Date of Decision : July 30, 2013 Bakhshish Singh and others .......Petitioners versus Union of India and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA. Present : Mr.Sumeet Mahajan, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Amit Kohar, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.Kunal Dawar, Advocate, for UOI. Mr.J.S.Puri, Additional AG, Punjab. --- 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?.2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?.3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?. Surya Kant, J.The petitioners seek quashing of the notification dated 11.11.2004 (Annexure P-5) issued by Union of India, Ministry of Defence, in exercise of their powers under Section 3 of the Works of Defence Act, 1903 (for short, the 1903 Act), whereby restrictions in terms of Section 7(b) of the said Act have been imposed directing to keep the land compri...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
United States v. Grundy & Thornburgh - 7 U.S. 337 (1806) U.S. Supreme Court United States v. Grundy & Thornburgh, 7 U.S. 3 Cranch 337 337 (1806) United States v. Grundy & Thornburgh 7 U.S. (3 Cranch) 337 ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF BALTIMORE Syllabus Under the Act of Congress of December 31, 1792, which declares "that if a false oath be taken in order to procure a register for a vessel, the vessel or its value shall be forfeited," the United States has an election to proceed against the vessel as forfeited or against the person who took the false oath for its value. But until that election is made, the property of the vessel does not vest in the United States, and the United States cannot maintain an action for money had and received against the assignees of the person who took the oath and who had become bankrupt, the assignees having sold the vessel and received the purchase money before seizure of the vessel. Error to the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2006SC980; 2006(3)CTC209; JT2006(1)SC457; (2006)2MLJ67(SC); 2006(1)SCALE385; (2006)2SCC1
Y.K. Sabharwal, C.J.1. The challenge in these petitions is to the constitutional validity of Notification dated 23rd May, 2005 ordering dissolution of the Legislative Assembly of the State of Bihar. It is a unique case. Earlier cases that came up before this Court were those where the dissolutions of Assemblies were ordered on the ground that the parties in power had lost the confidence of the House. The present case is of its own kind where before even the first meeting of the Legislative Assembly, its dissolution has been ordered on the ground that attempts are being made to cobble a majority by illegal means and lay claim to form the Government in the State and if these attempts continue, it would amount to tampering with constitutional provisions.2. One of the questions of far reaching consequence that arises is whether the dissolution of Assembly under Article 356(1) of the Constitution of India can be ordered to prevent the staking of claim by a political party on the ground that...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 2002(2)KarLJ391
ORDERChandrashekaraiah, J.1. The petitioner in this writ petition has sought for quashing of the order of suspension which is produced as Annexure-A in this writ petition.2. The petitioner is working as Assistant Revenue Officer in the Bangalore City Corporation, Chamarajpet Branch, Bangalore. The officers of the Lokayukta having found that the petitioner is possessing the properties disproportionate to his income, registered a case against him under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Similarly the Lokayukta registered one more case against another employee Sri C. Andani having found that he was also possessing the properties disproportionate to his income. Pursuant to these proceedings the Corporation kept both the petitioner and Sri C. Andani under suspension under Rule 10(1)(b) of the Karnataka Civil Services (CCA) Rules, 1957 until further orders awaiting the report from the Lokayukta. Thereafter, after some time the Corporation wrote a letter to the Lokayukt...
Tag this Judgment!