Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: coking coal mines nationalisation act 1972 section 5 acquisition of rights of owners of coke oven plants Court: delhi

Jaswant Worah and anr. Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 47(1992)DLT1; 1992(22)DRJ476

..... , 1990 passed by the 7th additional district judge, dhanbad in miscellaneous case no.54 etc. of 1985 where by the right of the petitioners to claim management compensation under the coking coal mines (nationalisation) act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the 'act') was rejected on the ground that on-the date of vesting, the petitioners were neither the owners nor occupiers rather they were ..... for compensation as owner of the ganhcodih colliery in accordance with law. (4) the coal mines were nationalised by the coking coal mines (nationalisation) act, 1972. under this act, the mines vested in the government with effect from 1st may, 1972. the act contains a schedule showing the various mines which come under the nationalisation scheme. the mines involved in this petition is shown as seriall no. 156, namely, ganhcodih, in .....

Action Committee Unaided Recognized Private School Vs. Honble Lt.Gover ...

Court : Delhi

..... shri ashoke sen drew pointed attention to the earlier affidavits filed on behalf of bharat coking coal limited and commented severely on the alleged contradictory reasons given therein for the exclusion of certain coke oven plants from the coking coal mines (nationalisation) act. but, in the ultimate analysis, we are not really to concern ourselves ..... is presumed not to have intended an excess of jurisdiction. in sanjeev coke mfg. co. v. bharat coking coal ltd. the constitution bench speaking through chinnappa reddy, j., had observed, in the context of interpretation of the provisions of the coking coal mines (nationalisation) act, 1972 that the court is not concerned with the statements made ..... of his submissions, he relied upon the judgments of the supreme court in mr. x vs. hospital z , (1998) 8 scc296 sanjeev coke manufacturing company vs. m/s. bharat coking coal limited and another, (supra); and n.k. bajpai vs. union of india and another, (2012) 4 scc653 47. consequently, according to .....

Forum for Promotion ofquality Education for All Vs. Lt. Governor of De ...

Court : Delhi

..... shri ashoke sen drew pointed attention to the earlier affidavits filed on behalf of bharat coking coal limited and commented severely on the alleged contradictory reasons given therein for the exclusion of certain coke oven plants from the coking coal mines (nationalisation) act. but, in the ultimate analysis, we are not really to concern ourselves ..... is presumed not to have intended an excess of jurisdiction. in sanjeev coke mfg. co. v. bharat coking coal ltd. the constitution bench speaking through chinnappa reddy, j., had observed, in the context of interpretation of the provisions of the coking coal mines (nationalisation) act, 1972 that the court is not concerned with the statements made ..... of his submissions, he relied upon the judgments of the supreme court in mr. x vs. hospital z , (1998) 8 scc296 sanjeev coke manufacturing company vs. m/s. bharat coking coal limited and another, (supra); and n.k. bajpai vs. union of india and another, (2012) 4 scc653 47. consequently, according to .....

Action Committee Unaided Recognized Private School Vs. Honble Lt.Gover ...

Court : Delhi

..... shri ashoke sen drew pointed attention to the earlier affidavits filed on behalf of bharat coking coal limited and commented severely on the alleged contradictory reasons given therein for the exclusion of certain coke oven plants from the coking coal mines (nationalisation) act. but, in the ultimate analysis, we are not really to concern ourselves ..... is presumed not to have intended an excess of jurisdiction. in sanjeev coke mfg. co. v. bharat coking coal ltd. the constitution bench speaking through chinnappa reddy, j., had observed, in the context of interpretation of the provisions of the coking coal mines (nationalisation) act, 1972 that the court is not concerned with the statements made ..... of his submissions, he relied upon the judgments of the supreme court in mr. x vs. hospital z , (1998) 8 scc296 sanjeev coke manufacturing company vs. m/s. bharat coking coal limited and another, (supra); and n.k. bajpai vs. union of india and another, (2012) 4 scc653 47. consequently, according to .....

Forum for Promotion ofquality Education for All Vs. Lt. Governor of De ...

Court : Delhi

..... shri ashoke sen drew pointed attention to the earlier affidavits filed on behalf of bharat coking coal limited and commented severely on the alleged contradictory reasons given therein for the exclusion of certain coke oven plants from the coking coal mines (nationalisation) act. but, in the ultimate analysis, we are not really to concern ourselves ..... is presumed not to have intended an excess of jurisdiction. in sanjeev coke mfg. co. v. bharat coking coal ltd. the constitution bench speaking through chinnappa reddy, j., had observed, in the context of interpretation of the provisions of the coking coal mines (nationalisation) act, 1972 that the court is not concerned with the statements made ..... of his submissions, he relied upon the judgments of the supreme court in mr. x vs. hospital z , (1998) 8 scc296 sanjeev coke manufacturing company vs. m/s. bharat coking coal limited and another, (supra); and n.k. bajpai vs. union of india and another, (2012) 4 scc653 47. consequently, according to .....

Action Committee Unaided Recognized Private School Vs. Honble Lt.Gover ...

Court : Delhi

..... shri ashoke sen drew pointed attention to the earlier affidavits filed on behalf of bharat coking coal limited and commented severely on the alleged contradictory reasons given therein for the exclusion of certain coke oven plants from the coking coal mines (nationalisation) act. but, in the ultimate analysis, we are not really to concern ourselves ..... is presumed not to have intended an excess of jurisdiction. in sanjeev coke mfg. co. v. bharat coking coal ltd. the constitution bench speaking through chinnappa reddy, j., had observed, in the context of interpretation of the provisions of the coking coal mines (nationalisation) act, 1972 that the court is not concerned with the statements made ..... of his submissions, he relied upon the judgments of the supreme court in mr. x vs. hospital z , (1998) 8 scc296 sanjeev coke manufacturing company vs. m/s. bharat coking coal limited and another, (supra); and n.k. bajpai vs. union of india and another, (2012) 4 scc653 47. consequently, according to .....

Balaraj Jadhav & Ors. Vs.union of India & Ors.

Court : Delhi

..... that effect in the act itself. the question, therefore, is whether absence of specific provision as contained in the banking companies (acquisition and transfer of undertakings) act or in the coal mines nationalisation act, 1973 that the shareholding shall always be held by the government, will give a different complexion to these provisions. when the provisions of the act provide for vesting of ..... to subserve the common good. the argument that there is no specific provision in the act as contained the banking companies (acquisition and transfer of undertakings) act or in the coal mines nationalisation act, 1973 does not carry the matter any further because the idea embedded in those provisions are this enactment, as explained earlier. if disinvestment takes place and the company ceases .....

Ram Bhawan Upadhyay vs.uoi & Ors.

Court : Delhi

..... 06.1968 to 15.06.1969 were not traceable. it has also been stated therein that even otherwise, the period in question is prior to the nationalisation of the coal mines and the coal industry, which took place in the year 1972 and, therefore, the bccl cannot be faulted for not having the said records. by placing reliance on ..... w.p.(c) 12314/2005 page 9 of 12 be appropriate to refer to the relevant portions of paragraphs 55 & 63 of the coal mines provident fund scheme, which reads as under:-" 55. disposal of the coal mines provide fund:-"(1) xx (2) amount credit to the reserve account under sub- paragraph(4) of paragraph 63, may in accordance ..... reasons for termination.4. after three years, the petitioner also resigned from ncs on 13.08.1972 and joined bharat coking coal limited (hereinafter referred to as bccl) on 14.08.1972, whereafter he joined another coal mine, namely maharali coalfields limited, in 1997 from where he ultimately retired on 31.12.2002 upon attaining the age of superannuation .....

Om Parkash Pahwa and ors. Vs. State of Delhi and ors.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 1998VAD(Delhi)285; 3(1998)CLT609; 75(1998)DLT3; 1998(46)DRJ719

..... and properly coordinated road transport service, it is necessary in public interest that the entire area defined as the national capital territory of delhi be nationalised for the purpose of operating stage carriage bus services and that these stage carriage services should be run and operated by the delhi transport corporation or ..... formulation of the impugned scheme and as pointed out by the respondents may briefly be noticed. prior to 1992, bus service in delhi was largely a nationalised affair. the buses were plied under delhi transport corporation, a public sector transport undertaking, hereinafter 'dtc', for short. very few stage carriage permits were issued ..... badges are not being issued by the sta frequently. 11) other factors are mechanical failure, natural disturbance, electrical poles etc. they further stated that nationalisation is not the solution of accidents. the person responsible for the accident is not being penalised and the poor bus owners are being penalised by imposing .....