Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: border security force act 1968 section 137 scope of power of suspension Court: karnataka Page 1 of about 12 results (0.050 seconds)

Shri Chandram J.M. S/O Shri Jettappa Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) Rep. ...

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : 2008(3)KarLJ303; 2007(6)AIRKarR441; 2008LabIC(NOC)83(Kar)

..... by the petitioner; that the writ petition is to be dismissed.34. petitioner is a member of the border security force which is a paramilitary force created under the border security force act, 1968. this force was part of central police act, 1949. it was given a separate identity as border security force. it appears after the year 1965, it was sought to be given an independent status and that heralded the legislation of the border security force act, 1968. members of this force are governed by the provisions of this act. the service conditions are as prescribed by the central government in terms of section 6 of the act. while tenure of service is during the pleasure of the president in terms of section 9 of the act, the central government may dismiss or remove from service any .....

Constable Basavaraj Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : [2005(107)FLR468]; ILR2005KAR3513

..... constable, has challenged the order of dismissal dated 7.10.2001 issued by the respondent no. 2/ the commandant of bsf (annexure-a) dismissing the petitioner from service on the ground that he was found guilty of charge under section 20(a) of the border security force act, 1968 (in short, 'the act').2. the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:-(a) to quash the order of dismissal dated 7.10.2001 bearing no. estt/ssfc-br/63 bn/2001/7726-34 made against the petitioner;(b) to quash the ..... s f laws-practice and procedure, there is no provision for judicial review, and therefore the writ petition is liable to be dismissed as devoid of any merits,8. as per annexure-b viz., the proceedings of the summary security force court pertaining to the trial of the accused for the offence under section 20(a) of the act, the commandant, 63 bn bsf had framed a charge on 4,9.2001 against the petitioner alleging that on 30.7.2001, the petitioner assaulted head constable puran singh at samba railway .....

Constable Basavaraj S/O Vurpanna Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) Rep. by ...

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR2007KAR485; 2006(4)KCCR2695; 2006(6)AIRKarR272

..... /2005 are the respondents in the writ petition.3. the challenge in the writ petition was against the orders dated 7-10-2001 and 27-2-2002 produced as annexures-'a' and 'k'. as per annexure-'a', the petitioner basavaraj who is a constable in the border security force was dismissed from service with effect from 7-10-2001. as per annexure-'k' order, the statutory petition filed by the writ petitioner against the dismissal from service was rejected.4. on the basis of an incident which took place on 30 ..... -7-2001 in the special train carrying troops from samba to farrakka, proceedings were initiated against the petitioner and he was tried by the summary security force court (ssfc) tinder the bsf act. the allegation was that during a quarrel between head constable puran singh and head constable b. balakrishnan, the petitioner intervened and while separating the quarrelling head constables, the petitioner assaulted his superior officer .....

N. Bommon Behram and anr. Vs. the Government of Mysore and ors.

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : AIR1970Kant89; AIR1970Mys89

..... to appreciate the points urged on behalf of the petitioners, it is necessary to refer briefly to the relevant facts that have given rise to the writ petition. certain lands which are owned by the petitioners were notified for acquisition under section 4(1) of the act. the lands were required for the use of the border security force under the control of the central government. prior to the issue of this notification on 1-5-1967, there were certain negotiations between the petitioners, the chief secretary to government of mysore and other officers at a meeting held on march 31, 1967 .....

Sri Dattusingh Rathod Vs. The Union Of India

Court : Karnataka

..... s court, kalaburagi bench in w.p.no.80352/2010. this court, by its order dated 10.06.2016 noticing the fact that the order of penalty of dismissal from service was appealable under section 117 of the border security force act, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as the said act for short) directed the petitioner to file an appeal before the appellate authority.4. petitioner in terms of the direction of this court filed an appeal, which also came to be rejected by an order dated 06.02.2017. it is the ..... security force on 04.04.1999. during the month of june, 2009 when he was posted to work as a constable at calcutta border had applied for leave on certain issues with regard to health of his wife and daughter. during the pendency of consideration of the said leave application, on 09.06.2009, he was found in an intoxicated state and quarrelling with some of the civilians. this act of the petitioner lead to issuance of a charge sheet dated 22.06.2009 against him for the alleged misconduct of being .....

Mr P S Venkatesh Vs. The Secretary

Court : Karnataka

..... , such incidence of service is hedged by the conditions stipulated in either the rules/government orders/policy. the transfer of the bsf personnel is regulated by the border security force (tenure of posting and deputation) rules, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as the said rules for short). these rules are framed under sub section (2) of section 141 of the border security force act, 1968. it cannot, therefore, be in doubt that the rules are statutes. the rule that is germane for consideration of the issue in the lis is rule 10 ..... , which reads as follows: 10. terminal posting members of the force having good record of service and free from disciplinary/vigilance angle, may be given posting near their home town .....

Mahalingappa s/o.amareshwarappa Mathapathi Vs. The State Through Lokay ...

Court : Karnataka Kalaburagi

..... brief factual matrix of the case which resulted in conviction of the accused by the trial court.3. pw.11-mr. mahantayya has lodged the first information report as per ex.p16 stating that, he has been working in border security force at kolkata. his father by name panchayya has a landed property in survey no.77 measuring 1 acre 39 guntas situated at koutha-k village, aurad taluk, bidar district. about 6 to 7 ..... plain reading of the above said provisions, it is incumbent upon the prosecution to show that the money was received by the accused as illegal gratification as noted in section 7 or it was received by the accused by illegal or corrupt means as mentioned in section 13(1)(d) of the act in order to draw a presumption that such amount was received as a motive or reward for the purpose of showing any official favour in favour of the decoy witness. therefore, mere recovery of money may include the possibility of the accused being an innocent recipient of the amount and the prosecution .....

Nagaraju Vs. State of Karnataka and Others

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR1999KAR2903; 1999(4)KarLJ668

..... licence to clubs, occasional licences, special licences, hotel and boarding house licences, tourist hotel licences, tourist hotel beer bar licences, military canteen licences, military canteen stores bonded warehouse licence, border security force or paramilitary force licences, refreshment room (bar) licence, auctioneer's licences. rule 4 deals with filing of applications; rules 4-a, 5 provides for grant of licences with restriction or conditions; rule 7 deals ..... and includes 'milk punch' and other liquors consisting of or containing spirits; sub-section (18) defines liquor; sub-section (23) defines 'prescribed' as meaning prescribed by rules made under the act. section 26 of the act provides for granting of the licences or permit under the act and on payment of fees for a prescribed period subject to such restrictions and on such conditions as may be prescribed. section 29 empowers the government for cancelling or suspending licence. section 30 empowers for withdrawing the licence and .....

Nandi Infrastructure Corridor Enterprise Ltd. Represented by Its Duly ...

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR2008KAR1933; 2008(5)KarLJ583; 2008(2)KCCRSN90

..... pipeline running from tataguni opts hegganahalli ground level reservoir and this is the main pipeline supplying water to the western and northern pert of bangalore city, alongwith new bangalore international airport, indian air force, border security force premises etc. the pipeline is in service for all 24 hours and 365 days of the year. if the proposed work of shifting the pipeline is taken up, the above areas and premises would be water-starved and would be severely ..... court having, tone and again, declared that the project is in public interest and that the petitioner have every right to execute the project and the components thereof, it would follow that the respondents have a duty cast on them to act in tandem with the petitioners in executing the project notwithstanding, the hurdles that required to be taken in stride. the respondents seeking to procrastinate on the ground that the shifting of the utlites, as aforesaid, would result in hardship is hardly a ground that can be raised .....

State of Karnataka Vs. Sri.Manoj@ Manjunatha S/C Raju

Court : Karnataka

1. This appeal is filed by the State challenging the judgment dated 15.12.2004 parsed by the II Add! Sessions Judge. Mysore in Spl. Case No. 154/ 2001 acquitting the respondent of the offence under Sections 366, 376 and 41.7 of IPC and under Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.2. It is the ottse of the prosecution that on 29.12.2001 at about 12 noon at Kothegala village of H.D.Kote taluk accused kidnapped CW-1 Savitha with the intention that she may be compelled to illicit intercourse and thereby he is alleged to have committed offence punishable under Section 366 of IPC. It is further alleged that on the above said date and subsequently at different dates, at Mysore and other towns he committed rape on CW-1 Savitha and thereby he is alleged to have committed offence punishable under Section 376 IPC. It is further charged against the accused that he has cheated CW 1 Savitha by having forcible sexual intercourse with her by as...