Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: bihar and uttar pradesh alteration of boundaries act 1968 section 14 arrears of taxes Page 4 of about 322 results (0.543 seconds)

M.Arumugam Vs. State of Tamil Nadu

Court : Chennai

..... the society, there was an attempt to alter the constitution of the society. this led to litigation by filing of suits in civil court in allahabad. the uttar pradesh legislature passed an act called up hindi sahitya sammelan act no.36 of 1956, under which, a statutory body was created under the name of hindi sahitya ..... 28530, 28800, 30305 and 33951 of 2012.168. learned additional advocate general produced before us, the copies of the cooperative societies act of the states of goa, bihar, jharkhand and mizoram and contended that similar provisions as in section 21(2) of the tamil nadu act are available in these legislations. mr.v.raghavachari, learned counsel ..... of the governing body.80. learned additional advocate general also referred to provisions similar to section 21(2) available in the enactments of other states, namely, bihar, goa, jharkhand and mizoram. he also referred to the model co-operative societies act providing for the exercise of authority by the general body in the absence .....

State of Orissa and ors. Vs. Titaghur Paper Mills Company Limited and ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1985SC1293; 1986(1)ARBLR135(SC); 1985(2)SCALE410; 1985Supp(1)SCC280; [1985]3SCR26; [1985]60STC213(SC)

..... england and india and to hold that it authorized the imposition of a tax only when there was a completed sale involving transfer of title. in that case the uttar pradesh sales tax act, 1948, had been amended so as to include forward contracts in the definition of 'sale' and to provide that forward contracts should be deemed ..... to note what the judicial committee of the privy council had to say in the case of raja bahadur kamkashya narain singh of ramgarh v. commissioner of income-tax, bihar and orissa (1943) 11 i.t.r. 513. about the payment of minimum royalty under a coal mining lease. the question in that case was whether the ..... a number of cases, these rights were spread over many years. some of the agreements were registered and the others unregistered. after the coining into force of the madhya pradesh abolition of proprietaryrights (estates, mahals, alienated lands) act, 1950, the government disclaimed the agreements and auctioned the rights afresh, acting under section 3 of the said act .....

State of Gujarat Vs. Shantilal Mangaldas and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1969SC634; (1970)72BOMLR1; (1969)GLR879(SC); (1969)1SCC509; [1969]3SCR341

..... in the state of bihar. in kameshwar singh v. state of bihar i.l.r.pat. 454 the patna high court held that the bihar land reforms act, 1951, contravened article 14 in that it accorded differential treatment to landowners in the matter of compensation. similar challenge raised to the uttar pradesh zamindari abolition and land ..... reforms act, 1950, was rejected by the high court of allahabad : surya pal v. state of u.p. i.l.r. [1952] all. 46. a group of petitions challenging the validity of the madhya pradesh abolition of proprietary rights (estates, mahals, ..... alienated lands) act 1951 was moved in this court: visheswar v. state of madhya pradesh : [1952]1scr1020 but before these petitions could be disposed of, the constitution (first amendment) act, 1951 .....

Ranga Reddy District Sarpanches' Association and Ors. Vs. Government o ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2004(2)ALD1; 2004(1)ALT659

..... of a.p. panchayat raj act, 1994, hereinafter referred to as 'act', several g.os., rules, comparative study of the provisions of the act in andhra pradesh with similar legislations in kerala, karnataka, bombay, west bengal etc., data collected by lok satta, local self government and autonomy thereof, suggestions by national commission to review ..... of the court nor the power of judicial review can be stretched that far so as to engulf a situation of this kind. in state of bihar v. bihar distillery ltd., : air1997sc1511 , it was held that an act of the legislature represents the will of the people and hence cannot be declared as unconstitutional ..... v. union of india, : [1950]1scr869 , state of west bengal v. anwar ali sarkar, : 1952crilj510 , syed quasim razvi v. state of hyderabad, : 1953crilj862 , budhan choudhary v. state of bihar, : 1955crilj374 , in re special courts bill, 1978, : [1979]2scr476 , e.p. royappa v. state of tamil nadu, : (1974)illj172sc , maneka gandhi v. union of india, : [ .....

The Aligarh Muslim University Through Its Vice-chancellor Vs. Malay Sh ...

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : 2006(1)AWC992

..... how this works out in practice.- if the 1981 act were not there, parliament would be legislating for aligarh muslim university, although the state of uttar pradesh would be legislating for other universities situated in the state of uttar pradesh under entry-32 of list-11. parliament could not, say, in 1980. even purport to make a law or cause a subordinate legislation to ..... for protection under article 30 of the constitution. this has been held in the judgment reported in 1970 s.c. 259 right rev. bishop s.k. patro v. state of bihar is relevant. in the above case the institution which was claiming benefit of article 30 was also a institution founded before enforcement of the constitution. in paragraph 8 of the .....

State of Karnataka Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1978SC68; (1977)4SCC608; [1978]2SCR1

..... on a recent decision of the supreme court in state of rajasthan and ors. v. union of india : [1978]1scr1 . the states of rajasthan, madhya pradesh, punjab, bihar, himachal pradesh and orissa filed suits under article 131 of the constitution against the union of india challenging a directive contained in a letter dated april 18, 1977 issued by the ..... court at nagpur held that the act does not confer on it the status of a court.285. the facts of the case are that the government of madhya pradesh appointed a commission of inquiry under the commissions of inquiry act, 1952, with hon'ble shri justice b. k. choudhuri as the sole member. the commission ..... conflict between constitutional provisions (see : i. c. golaknath v. state of punjab : [1967]2scr762 ; k.k. kochuni v. state of madras & kerala : [1960]3scr887 ; mohd. hanif v. state bihar : [1959]1scr629 ; state of m.p. v. ranojirao shinde : [1968]3scr489 ; prem channel garg v. excise commissioner, u.p. [1963] supp. (1) s.c.r. 885 , devadasanv. .....

Smt. Indira Nehru Gandhi Vs. Shri Raj NaraIn and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1975SC2299; 1975(Supp)SCC1; [1976]2SCR347

..... force for the furtherance of her election prospects in as much as the services of the district magistrate, superintendent of police rae bareli and the home secretary, uttar pradesh government were utilised for the purposes of the construction of rostrums and installation of loudspeakers at various places within the constituency where the appellant addressed her election ..... to the first constitutional amendment which was passed in june 1951, this court held in sri sankari prasad singh deo v. union of india and state of bihar that the power of amendment conferred by article 368 was not subject to any limitations, express or implied, and that fundamental rights were within the sweep of ..... at all. as a proof of that, however, it will accept, as conclusive evidence, a certificate of the speaker that a bill has been duly passed. (see : state of bihar v. kameshwar : [1952]1scr1020 .510- again, this court has held, in sharma v. sri krishna. : [1961]1scr96 . that a notice issued by the speaker of .....

P.S. Gill and ors. Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 16(1979)DLT266; ILR1979Delhi601; 1979RLR497

S. Ranganathan, J.(1) These six Letters Patent Appeals and Civil Writ can be disposed of by a common judgment, as they raise common issues arising out of a notification dated the 24th October, 1961 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1894 Act') for the acquisition by the Government of about 16,000 acres of land situated in the village of Garhi Naraina which is situated within the limits of the Delhi Contonment (briefly referred to as 'Cantt.'). The public purpose specified in the notification was 'planned development of Delhi'. (2) A declaration under Section 6 of the 1894 Act was issued on 7th December, 1966 in pursuance of the earlier notification under Section 4. The six appellants filed writ petitions in this Court challenging the above two notifications on various grounds. These petitions having been dismissed by Prithviraj.J. by his judgment dated 18th December, 1975 (reported in 1976 1 Delhi 375, the writ petitioners have preferred ...

Ram Puri, Chandigarh Vs. Chief Commissioner, Chandigarh and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1982P& H301

M.M. Punchhi, J.1. In Amrit Sagar Kashyap v. Chief Commr., U. T. Chandigarh, (1980) 82 Pun LR 441, a Division Bench of this Court (the judgment of which was prepared by me and concurred by D. S. Tewatia, J.) had the occasion to interpret S. 8-A of the Capital of Punjab (Development and Regulation) Act, 1952 (for short the Act) and in particular the meaning of the words 'resume' and 'resumption' occurring prominently therein. The view thus taken came to be doubted very often necessitating its re-examination by a Full Bench, on these two matters being referred to it, being Civil Writ Petitions Nos. 2830 of 1970 and 1149 of 1979, which await disposal at our end. Amusingly it has again fallen to my share to prepare the judgment, be it a case of reorientation or refurbishing the earlier view or one of substitution or reversal. A fresh look on the subject becomes essential uninhibited of the view taken by the Division Bench.2. A small legislative history would not be out of place. The town o...

R.C. Poudyal and ors. Vs. Union of India and Others

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1993SC1804; JT1993(2)SC1; 1993(1)SCALE489; 1994Supp(1)SCC324; [1993]1SCR891

..... on the basis of separate electorates for members of different religious communities offends against this clause. (see : nain sukh das and anr. v. the state of uttar pradesh and ors.; : [1953]4scr1184 .188. similarly article 325 requires that there shall be one general electoral roll for every constituency for election to either house of ..... the delimitation of parliamentary and assembly constituencies order, 1976. the amended provisions of sub-section (3) of section 7 dealt with (besides dealing with arunachal pradesh) this matter. these special provisions have been challenged by the writ petitioner on various grounds.91. the first objection taken on behalf of the respondents is ..... , that is due to historical reasons, and that has always been recognised as a proper basis of classification under article 14.70. in state of madhya pradesh v. bhopal sugar industries ltd. : [1964]52itr443(sc) this court said:.the legislature has always the power to make special laws to attain particular objects .....