Displacency - Judgment Search Results

Rourkela Local Displaced Association and ors. Vs. State of Orissa and ...

Court: Orissa

Reported in: 107(2009)CLT269

for speedy acquisition under the provisions of Orissa Development of Industries, Irrigation, Agriculture, Capital Construction and Resettlement of Displaced Persons (Land Acquisition) Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for the development of industrfes, namely, establishment

Govt. of A.P. and Others Vs. Displaced Ryots Association of Pothunuri ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 1998(6)ALD706; 1998(6)ALT409

ORDERUmesh Chandra Banerjee, CJ 1. This writ appeal has been placed in this list for hearing after having an order of remand from the Supreme Court for further consideration of the Appeal. The Supreme Court, while...

Damodar Valley Corporation and Another Vs. Damodar Valley Corporation ...

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: AIR1993SC2478; [1994(68)FLR558]; 1993LabIC1675; (1993)IILLJ745SC; 1993Supp(3)SCC524

Court affirming the order of the learned single Judge. The dispute is about the manner of absorbing the displaced persons. The details have been set out in the Judgment of the Division Bench. Now 91 petitioners claiming

Action Council of Displacing Traders of Kmrl at High Court Junction vs ...

Court: Kerala

21ST DAY OF MAY 2024 / 31ST VAISAKHA, 1946 WP(C) NO. 14980 OF 2017 PETITIONER: ACTION COUNCIL OF DISPLACING TRADERS OF KMRL AT HIGH COURT JUNCTION EDAPPALLY, KOCHI-24,REPRESENTED BY ITS CONVENER. BY ADV SRI.N.K.MOHANLAL RESPONDENTS: 1 DISTRICT

Assoc. of East Pakistan Displaced Person Vs. Dda and anr.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2003(68)DRJ652

the interest of various persons who are seeking allotment. Petitioner No.1, association, was founded by persons who were displaced from East Pakistan and for whose benefit Rehabilitation Scheme was formulated by respondent No.2. In terms of the

Damodar Valley Corporation and ors. Vs. Damodar Valley Corporation Dis ...

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: (1992)2CALLT244(HC)

referred to as D.V.C.).2. The facts leading to the moving of the writ petition by the Damodar Valley Displaced Employees' Union (hereinafter referred to as the Union), and the others are set out hereinbelow.3. Petitioner No. 1

Nazma Khatoon, Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.

Court: Jharkhand

Reported in: [2005(2)JCR587(Jhr)]

upon the respondents to cancel the allotment of 68 shops allotted to the persons who are not even displaced persons and allot those shops only to those persons whose names have been registered as displaced persons.11. In