Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: army act 1950 section 16 persons to be attested Sorted by: old Year: 2011 Page 1 of about 25 results (0.131 seconds)

N. Sasi Vs. Deputy Directorate General, D.S.C., Represented by Its Dir ...

Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Kochi

..... to be resolved in the instant case are, firstly whether the army acts and rules are relevant to the dsc or not, and secondly, whether the petitioner is eligible to be issued his army discharge certificate. we have perused the relevant orders and these are discussed in the subsequent paragraphs. 14. the army act, 1950 in section 3(vi) has defined a 'corps' in the following manner ..... :- 'corps' means any separate body of persons subject to this act which is prescribed as a corps for the purpose of all or any of the provisions of this act . 15. the army rule, 1954, chapter vii, rule 187 reads as follows .....

Ram Singh Vs. Union of India and Others

Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Jaipur

..... apprehension roll, a court of inquiry was held which declared him deserter. when apprehended and did not improve his behaviour, a show cause notice under section 20(3) of the army act read with army rule 17 was served but the applicant refused to accept the same, it was read over and explained to him. since no reply was submitted, ..... thereafter, he was declared as deserter. he was apprehended on 4.8.1985 and thereafter, show cause notice was served upon him under section 20(3) of the army act read with rule 16 of the army rules but the applicant refused to receive the notice as well as dismissal order. he was made to understand in the presence of ..... bad in law, illegal and against the rules. he has submitted that since he was a patient of psychosis, no administrative proceedings under section 20(3) of the army act read with rule 16 of the army rules should have been initiated against him as he was unable to understand the proceedings initiated against him. according to him, neither his .....

ic-43708n Lt Col Prithiviraj Patnaik Vs. Government of India, Through ...

Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Chennai

..... said issue being barred by principles of res judicata or even constructive res judicata. after the constitution of this armed forces tribunal by virtue of the section 14(5) of the armed forces tribunal act, 2007, this tribunal is considered to sit in the arm chair of the selection board and decide the issues raised in the application before it ..... it is also highlighted that the applicant did not bring out this aspect to the notice of superior authorities, in accordance with para 317 of the regulations for the army 1987 if his commanding officer did not disclose the recovery. 5(d) the profile of the applicant is not as projected by him. he has large number of ..... the reasons stated in the affidavit to the application? 5. the respondents in their counter (reply statement) would contend that as per the promotion policy, promotions in the army upto the rank of maj were by time scale till 16th december 2004. as per the new promotion policy, no selection board was held for promotion to the rank of .....

Prem Kumar Singh and Others Vs. State of U.P. and Others

Court : Allahabad

..... munivelu versus the government of india and others, at page 321). reference may also be made to cr.p.c sections 93 (i), 328 (i), 438; fera sections 37, 38; ndps act section 37; income tax act, 1922 section 34-a and air 1971 sc 2451, sheo nath singh versus the appellate assistant commissioner of income tax (central), calcutta ..... that they were inadequately represented would not mean following of constitutional limitations and requirements prescribed therein. 139. while making such a provision under section 3(7) of the act of 1994, the state did not undertake any exercise for having quantifiable data with regard to backwardness of the class, inadequate representation and ..... reverse discrimination. in the absence of any exercise having been done as already discussed and referred to above, by first providing reservation under section 3(7) of the act of 1994 and thereafter with accelerated seniority to scheduled castes and scheduled tribe government servants by inserting rule 8-a in the rules, .....

R. Mallappa, Ex-gnr (Operator) Vs. the Union of India, Represented by ...

Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Kochi

..... as well as the proceedings was signed by col.r.ravikumar, who was his commander. it is also averred that the request of the petitioner filed under section 164(2) of army act was to convert the order of dismissal into discharge. 5. the following points arise for consideration in this case. (1)whether the case of the ..... that even if the entire case of the respondents is accepted, the offence committed by the petitioner would come only under section 39 of army act, whereas the charge framed is for the offence under section 38(1) of the army act, which is illegal. it is also averred that captain pradeep dhiman was detailed as friend of the accused. captain pradeep ..... was awarded. but in the discharge certificate it is recorded that the petitioner is unfit for dsc and civil services. the petitioner filed a petition under section 164(2) of the army act and the same was dismissed on 29.7.2008. he submitted another petition on 16.9.2008 and also issued a notice to the respondents. thereafter .....

Ajay Bajaj and ors. Vs. the State of Maharashtra

Court : Delhi

..... recording subjective satisfaction, must have obviously considered as to whether the goods found in possession and seized from the petitioner were covered by the sub-clauses of section 111 of the customs act or not. in the case of n.k. bapna (supra) decided by a three- judge bench of the supreme court, similar grievance has been rejected ..... 20th december, 2002, and yet, the order of detention, which was passed on 4th september, 2002, was not served on him. besides, no process under section 7 of the act was issued against him, and the state of bihar took no effective steps whatsoever to arrest him. that showed that the order of detention was passed for a ..... in mind all aspects, but was found to be devoid of merits.7. indubitably, the power to execute detention order vests in the appropriate authority. indeed, section 11 of the act provides that it is open to the appropriate government to reject or modify the detention order "at any time". that does not mean that the appropriate government can .....

Kailas and Others .. Vs. State of Maharashtra Tr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... suffer ri for one year and to pay a fine of rs. 100/-.6. in appeal before the high court the appellants were acquitted of the offence under section 3 of the sc/st act, but the conviction under the provisions of the ipc were confirmed. however, that part of the order regarding fine was set aside and each of the appellant ..... original inhabitants of india.35. the bravery of the bhils was accepted by that great indian warrior rana pratap, who held a high opinion of bhils as part of his army.36. the injustice done to the tribal people of india is a shameful chapter in our country's history. the tribals were called `rakshas' (demons), `asuras', and what not. they ..... village while being beaten and abused by the accused herein.6. the four accused were convicted by the additional sessions judge, ahmednagar on 05.02.1998 under sections 452, 354, 323, 506(2) read with section 34 ipc and sentenced to suffer ri for six months and to pay a fine of rs. 100/-. they were also sentenced to suffer ri for .....

Akbar Ali Vs. U.Narayanankutty

Court : Kerala

Reported in : ILR2011(1)Ker877

..... the order of the learned rent controller and the judgment of the learned appellate authority. we are reminded of the contours of our revisional jurisdiction under section 20 of the act. there is no illegality, irregularity or impropriety in the finding entered by the courts below. since the tenants could not succeed in proving the two ..... and connected cases 11(3) there would be difference in the defensive pleas especially when the respective tenants put forward claim for protection under the second proviso to section 11(3) of the act. 12. another decision of this court in sasikumar v. sheeba [2009(4) klt 384] [in which one of us was a party - pius c. ..... filed by other seven tenants were dismissed by the learned appellate authority confirming the order of eviction r.c.r.3/2011 and connected cases under section 11(3) of the act. challenging the concurrent verdicts the tenants have come up in revision. they contend that the joint trial allowed by the rent controller is unsustainable since .....

Subhash Chandra Hajra Vs. Union of India Service Through Ministry of D ...

Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Kolkata

..... in case ibid documents were produced, the respondents could not perhaps justify denial of promotion to the rank of subedar major to the petitioner. section 114(g) of the indian evidence act, 1872 provides for such contingencies where the court could take such presumption. 26. the petitioners plea for grant of honorary commission as one of ..... since 1996. no new facts emerged from this supplementary affidavit of 6th december 10. decision 16. the petitioner subhash chandra hajra, a retired subedar of the army in corps of signals, having been aggrieved for not getting his promotion to the rank of subedar major nor getting honorary commission before he retired in november ..... of his havildars seniority for which he still has not received any reply from the authorities. the petitioner also put up a statutory complaint to the chief of army staff vide his complaint dated 29 october 1994 seeking redress for two grievances; firstly, for supersession to the rank of subedar major, secondly, for no-grant .....

Commissioner of Central Excise, Madurai Vs. Sree Kaderi Ambal Steels L ...

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai

the respondents herein, manufacturers of ms ingots, were working under the compounded levy scheme under section 3a of the central excise act, 1944 and exercised their option to pay duty under rule 96zo (3) of the central excise rules, 1944. their annual production capacity was determined at 12800 mts under the induction ..... to interest runs concurrently with duty liability. the decision of the apex court relied upon by the commissioner (appeals) is misplaced as it relates to the provisions of the customs act wherein no time limit has been prescribed. on the other hand, in the case of arun smelters ltd. vs cce chennai [2009 (239) elt 378], the tribunal has held that .....