Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2003(5)ALD516; 2003(4)ALT177
B. Sudershan Reddy, J.1. The constitutional validity of Section 12-A of the A.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1964 (for short 'the Act') is the primary issue in these cases.2. The petitioners are aggrieved by the action of respondents in proposing to transfer the assets of the Co-operative Sugar Factories in favour of private individuals on the ground that they have become sick and there is no possibility of rehabilitating the same.3. In W.P. No. 11937 of 2002, the first petitioner is the Anakapalle Co-operative Sugar Limited itself, represented by its Chairman. In all other writ petitions, the petitioners are the members and shareholders in Co-operative Sugar Factories.4. India is one of the largest producers of sugar and is in fierce competition with Brazil for the first position. The country shares about 13.25% of the world's sugar production and 41.11% of the sugar production in Asia. It contributes 2% to the National Gross Domestic Product and employs over and above forty million c...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1953Ori121
Jagannadhadas, C.J.1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution by the petitioner who is the proprietor of Madhupur Estate in Cuttack district, against the State of Orissa and the Court of Wards of the Orissa State, as well as against the Deputy Collector in charge of the Wards Estate. The State Government by virtue of the powers conferred on it under Section 16, Orissa Court of Wards Act, 1947, issued notification No. 9876/R dated the 7th December 1951, in the Revenue Department declaring the petitioner a disqualified proprietor under Section 10 (f) (iv) of the said Act and published the same in the Orissa Gazette in accordance with the provision of Section 21 of the Act. The Court of Wards assumed superintendence of the Madhupur Estate by virtue of the said notification on the 8th December 1951. Since then, the Estate has been under the management of the Court of Wards. The petitioner has accordingly come forward with this application dated the 5th March 1952, chal...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P. (C) 309/2015 % Judgment delivered on:11. 02.2015 JINDAL STEEL & POWER LIMITED & ANOTHER Petitioners versus UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case:For the Petitioners : Mr Kapil Sibal, Mr Rajiv Nayar, Sr Advocates with Mr Sanjeev Kapoor, Mr Rajat Jariwal and Mr Aakash Bajaj For the Respondents : Mr Mukul Rohatgi, AG and Mr Sanjay Jain, ASG with Mr Akshay Makhija, Mr Shresth Jain and Ms Devanshi Singh. WITH WP (C) 310/2015 JINDAL STEEL & POWER LIMITED & OTHERS Petitioners versus UNION OF INDIA & ANOTHER Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case:For the Petitioners : Dr A.M. Singhvi with Mr Jayant Bhushan, Sr Advocates, Mr Sanjeev Kapoor, Mr Prateek Kumar, Ms Diya Chaturvedi and Mr L. Zafeer Ahmed For the Respondents : Mr Mukul Rohatgi, AG and Mr Sanjay Jain, ASG with Mr Akshay Makhija, Mr Shresth Jain and Ms Astha Jain. CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDE...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P. (C) 309/2015 % Judgment delivered on:11. 02.2015 JINDAL STEEL & POWER LIMITED & ANOTHER Petitioners versus UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case:For the Petitioners : Mr Kapil Sibal, Mr Rajiv Nayar, Sr Advocates with Mr Sanjeev Kapoor, Mr Rajat Jariwal and Mr Aakash Bajaj For the Respondents : Mr Mukul Rohatgi, AG and Mr Sanjay Jain, ASG with Mr Akshay Makhija, Mr Shresth Jain and Ms Devanshi Singh. WITH WP (C) 310/2015 JINDAL STEEL & POWER LIMITED & OTHERS Petitioners versus UNION OF INDIA & ANOTHER Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case:For the Petitioners : Dr A.M. Singhvi with Mr Jayant Bhushan, Sr Advocates, Mr Sanjeev Kapoor, Mr Prateek Kumar, Ms Diya Chaturvedi and Mr L. Zafeer Ahmed For the Respondents : Mr Mukul Rohatgi, AG and Mr Sanjay Jain, ASG with Mr Akshay Makhija, Mr Shresth Jain and Ms Astha Jain. CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDE...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2004(2)BLJR1264; JT2004(5)SC571; 2004(3)SCALE519; (2004)4SCC529
A.C. Lakshmanan, J.1. The above appeal, arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No. 11082/1998 was filed against the final judgment and order passed in Civil Revision Petition No. 225/1992 dated 23.09.1997 by the High Court of Judicature at Patna whereby the High Court dismissed the Civil Revision Petition.BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE:2. The appellant-company is a Central Government Company within the meaning of Section 617 of the Companies Act, constituted under the Coal Nationalisation Act in and around of Distt. Dhanbad in the State of Bihar.3. The appellant company after formed by the Central Government was appointed as custodian on behalf of the Central Government to manage the Company's Coal mines, the management of which were taken over by the Central Government on enactment of the Coal Mines Act.4. The intervening period i.e. between the 17.10.1971 to 30.04.1972 is known as Management period during which the management of such coal mines was with the appellant-company. During the said man...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
United States v. Navajo Nation - 537 U.S. 488 (2003) OCTOBER TERM, 2002 Syllabus UNITED STATES v. NAVAJO NATION CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT No. 01-1375. Argued December 2, 2002-Decided March 4, 2003 The Indian Mineral Leasing Act of 1938 (IMLA) provides that "[u]nallotted lands within any Indian reservation," or otherwise under federal jurisdiction, "may, with the approval of the Secretary [of the Interior (Secretary)] ... , be leased for mining purposes, by authority of the tribal council or other authorized spokesmen for such Indians." 25 U. S. C. 396a. The 1M LA aims to provide Indian tribes with a profitable source of revenue and to foster tribal self-determination by giving Indians a greater say in the use and disposition of the resources on their lands. In 1964, the Navajo Nation (Tribe) permitted the predecessor of Peabody Coal Company (Peabody) to mine coal on the Tribe's lands pursuant to Lease 8580 (Lease or Lease 8580)....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 2008(I)OLR392
A.K. Samantaray, J.1. The petitioner has come with this writ petition for quashing the notice of superannuation vide letter No. MCL/OA/OC.3/SOM/Retirement/04/2738 dated 8.11.2004 and change of his date of initial entry into service from 1.1.1973 to 20.2.1968 and date of birth from 2.5.1945 to 23.7.1948.2. The grievance of the petitioner and his case as presented in this writ petition are that the petitioner originally belonged to village Dutta Pukur under Barasat Police Station in the District of 24-Praganas of West Bengal and he was born on 23.7.1948. The father of the petitioner was working as a security guard of the market yard and after his birth his horoscope was prepared showing his date of birth as 23.7.1948 and since the time of his birth was during the post partition period there was uncertainty and tension in the locality of West Bengal and as such the petitioner was given admission in the local school little late and after completing Class-VII while he was reading in Class-V...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (2004)187CTR(SC)219; [2004]266ITR721(SC); JT2004(1)SC375; 2004(1)SCALE425; (2004)10SCC201
CASE NO.:Appeal (civil) 1532 of 1993PETITIONER:State of West BengalRESPONDENT:Kesoram Industries Ltd. and Ors.DATE OF JUDGMENT: 15/01/2004BENCH:V.N.Khare CJI & R.C.Lahoti & B.N.Agarwal & S.B.Sinha & A.R.LakshmananJUDGMENT:JUDGMENTDELIVERED BY:R.C.LAHOTI, J.S.B.SINHA, J.WITHCivil Appeal Nos. 3518-3519 and 5149-54 of 1992, 1532-1533 and 2350 of 1993and 7614 of 1994 and C.A. Nos. 297, 298 and 299 of 2004 (Arising out of SLP(C) Nos. 3986 of 1993, 11596 and 17549 of 1994) with W.P. (C) Nos. 262,515, 641 and 642 of 1997, 347 and 360 of 1999, 50 and 553 of 2000, 207, 288and 389 of 2001 and 81 of 2003 and Civil Appeal Nos. 5027, 6643 to 6650 and6894 of 2000 and 1077 of 2001Decided On: 15.01.2004JUDGMENTR.C. Lahoti, J.This batch of matters, some appeals by special leave under Article 136 ofthe Constitution and some writ petitions filed in this Court, raise a fewquestions of constitutional significance centering around Entries 52, 54and 97 in List I and Entries 23, 49, 50 a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Eastern Enterprises v. Apfel - 524 U.S. 498 (1998) OCTOBER TERM, 1997 Syllabus EASTERN ENTERPRISES v. APFEL, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, ET AL. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT No. 97-42. Argued March 4, 1998-Decided June 25,1998 In 1946, a historic labor agreement between coal operators and the United Mine Workers of America (UMWA) led to the creation of benefit funds that provided for the medical expenses of miners and their dependents, with the precise benefits determined by UMWA-appointed trustees. Those trusts served as the model for the United Mine Workers of America Welfare and Retirement Fund (1947 W &R Fund), which was established by the National Bituminous Coal Wage Agreement of 1947 (1947 NBCWA). The Fund used proceeds of a royalty on coal production to provide benefits to miners and their families, and trustees determined benefit levels and other matters. The 1950 NBCWA created a new fund (1950 W &R Fund), which used a fix...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (SCSuppl)2004(3)CHN144; [2004(2)JCR278(SC)]; JT2004(3)SC286; (2004)3MLJ146(SC); 2004(3)SCALE203; (2004)3SCC504
R.C. Lahoti, J. 1. Just bare essential facts, as ascertainable on retrieval from a jumble of facts, are set out hereinafter, as those would suffice, in our opinion, to appreciate the crux of controversy arising for decision in this appeal. The controversy and the consequent litigation have spread over nearly four decades. In between, the parties have changed their identities by succession, amalgamation or supersession. The Coal Board, a statutory body has been dissolved and taken over by Union of India. What was M/s. Bhulanbaree Coal Co. Ltd. has taken shape as Oriental Coal Co. Ltd., and then the respondent No. 1 hereinafter. We would refer to the present parties only and that reference would include their respective predecessor legal entities. The Oriental Coal Co. Ltd. shall be referred to as 'Coal Company' for short.2. The Coal Company owns and possesses certain coal mines in the State of Bihar. The Coal Board was constituted under the provisions of the Coal Mines (Conservation and...
Tag this Judgment!