Court : Karnataka
1. Tills Appeal has been preferred by the State of Karnataka against the order of learned Single Judge who has issued a prerogative writ directing that the age of retirement of all Professors/Teachers in all Colleges in the State of Karnataka. regardless of whether they are serving in Central Universities or Educational Institutions directly funding by the Central Government/University Grants Commission should be increased to 65 years. 2. A piquant situation has arisen because two conflicting judgments has been passed by two co-ordinate Single Benches of this Court. The earlier decision emanates from the Circuit Bench at Oulbarga, rejecting the prayer for passing appropriate directions to the State and its Universities and Colleges increasing the age of retirement/superannuation of Professors and Teachers up to the date on which they attain the age of 65 years. The impugned Order which arrives at a diametrically and incompatibly opposite conclusion, has been passed by the learned Singl...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
(Prayer: These Writ Appeals are filed under Section-4 of the Karnataka High court Act praying to set aside the order passed in Writ Petition Nos.13449-453/2011, 13454/2011, c/w. 19712-718/2011, 20777/2011, 17650-652/2011, 17661-665/2011, 14269-270/2011, 17667/2011, 17726/2011, 17862-863/2011, 17874-876/2011, 8850/2011, 1229-300/2011, 11910-011/2011, 15005-15/2011, 15052/2011, 15530/2011, 15531-538/2011, 15777-785/2011, 15906/2011, 16004-009/2011, 18003-004/2011, 18364-366/2011, 18834/2011, 19074/2011, 19072-073/2011, 17605/2011, 17604/2011, 16312-316/2011, 15422-423/2011, 16326-332/2011, 16464/2011, 16467/2011, 16626/2011, 16683 and 16685/2011, 16684/2011, 16690-91/2011, 16075/2011, 17302/2011, 17458-463/2011, 17593/2011, 17918-920/2011, 19211/2011, 18302/2009, 20021/2011, 21110/2011 and W.P. Nos. 21548-549/2011, dated 22.06.2011.) VIKRAMAJIT SEN, AG.C.J. 1. This Appeal has been preferred by the State of Karnataka against the order of learned Single Judge who has issue a prerogative wr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS.5946-5947 OF2014KALYANI MATHIVANAN ... APPELLANT VERSUS K.V. JEYARAJ AND ORS. ... RESPONDENTS WITH CIVIL APPEAL NOS.6455-6456 OF2014AND CIVIL APPEAL NOS.8602-8603 OF2014 JUDGMENT SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA,J These appeals have been preferred by the appellants against a common judgment and order dated 26th June, 2014 passed by the Division Bench of the Madras High Court, Madurai Bench in Writ Petition (MD) No.11350 of 2012 and Writ Petition (MD) No.3318 of 2013. The aforesaid writ petitions were preferred by K.V. Jeyaraj and I. Ismail respondents/writ petitioners praying for issuance of a writ of quo warranto directing the appellant - Dr. Kalyani Mathivanan to show cause under what authority she continues to hold the office of the Vice- Chancellor, Madurai Kamaraj University.2. By the impugned judgment the High Court held that the appellant-Dr. Kalyani Mathivanan did not satisfy the eligibility crite...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + WRIT PETITON (CIVIL) NOS. 13825/2009 and 7699/2010 Reserved on: 22nd November, 2011 % Date of Decision:24th January, 2012 REGENCY SORAJ INFRASTRUCTURES ...Petitioner Through Mr. Porus F. Kaka, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Divesh Chawla, Mr. Arvind Gupta and Ms. Shiny Varghese, Advocates. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA and OTHERS .....Respondents Through Mr. A.S. Chandhiok, ASG with Ms. Sonia Mathur and Ms. Riya Kaul, Advocates for UOI. Mr. Kiran Babu, Sr. Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.3 and.4. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR SANJIV KHANNA, J.: The petitioner- Regency Soraj Infrastructures is a joint venture between M/s Flower Valley Properties and Buildcon and M/s L.K. Corporation. Pursuant to permission granted by the District Industrial Centre vide letter dated 3rd January, 2005 and the commencement certificate dated 7th January, 2005 issued by the Pune Municipal Corporation, they have constructed W.P. (C) Nos...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
(Prayer: These Writ Appeals filed under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act praying to set aside the order passed in the Writ Petition No.21876-87/2010 dated 07.01.2011.) 1. In all these appeals, the question raised relates to the competence of the State to levy Sales Tax/VAT on telecommunication service, interpretation of constitutional and statutory provisions and upholding the rule of law. Therefore, they are taken up for consideration together and disposed off by this common order. 2. For the purpose of clarity, the facts pleaded by appellants/petitioners in each of these cases are set out in brief. FACTUAL MATRIX W.A.Nos.654/2011, 817-828/2011, 789/2011, 790/2011, 805-816/2011, 792-803/2011, 791/2011 and 829-840/2011. 3. The appellant in all these appeals – M/s. Bharath Sanchar Nigam Limited (for short herein after referred to as the ‘BSNL’) is wholly owned Government of India undertaking providing all types of telecom services in the country except the met...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE2024INSC773IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 8315 8316 OF2014RENJITH K.G. & OTHERS ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS SHEEBA ...RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT R.MAHADEVAN, J.Heard Mr. Sanand Ramakrishnan, learned counsel for the appellants and Mrs.Nishe Rajen Shonker, learned counsel for the Respondent.2. These Civil Appeals are preferred against the judgment and order dated 11.11.2011 passed by the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam1 in E.F.A Nos.6 and 7 of 1998, whereby, the High Court allowed the said appeals and remanded the matter to the trial Court for fresh consideration.3. Succinctly stated facts are that the appellants are the legal representatives of the original plaintiff / decree holder viz., Padmakshy (deceased), who had filed a suit in O.S.No.38 of 1956 before the Sub Court, Parur, for partition and separate possession of her share in the plaint schedule 13 items of immovable properties. 1 Hereinafter shortly referred to as the High Cour...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
2024 INSC760NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.6274 OF2013M/s. Shriram Investments Appellant versus The Commissioner of Income Tax III Chennai Respondent JUDGMENT ABHAY S. OKA, J.FACTUAL ASPECTS1 The appellant-assessee filed a return of income on 19th November 1989 under the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, IT Act) for the assessment year 1989-90. On 31st October 1990, the appellant filed a revised return. As per intimation issued under Section 143(1)(a) of the IT Act on 27th August 1991, the appellant paid the necessary tax amount. On 29th October 1991, the appellant filed another revised return. The assessing officer did not take cognizance of the said revised return. Therefore, the appellant preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (for short, CIT (Appeals)). By the order dated 21st July 1993, the CIT (Appeals) dismissed the appeal on the ground that in view of Section 139(5) of the IT Act, the revis...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
2024 INSC754Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE/ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No 8629 of 2024 Union of India & Ors. Appellants Versus Rajeev Bansal Respondent WITH C.A. No.8631/2024 C.A. No.9270/2024 C.A. No.8632/2024 C.A. No.10238/2024 C.A. No.8640/2024 C.A. No.10239/2024 C.A. No.10240/2024 C.A. No.8644/2024 C.A. No.8641/2024 C.A. No.8650/2024 C.A. No.8645/2024 C.A. No.8643/2024 C.A. No.8649/2024 Page 1 of 112 C.A. No.8652/2024 C.A. No.8642/2024 C.A. No.8647/2024 C.A. No.8636/2024 C.A. No.8646/2024 C.A. No.8639/2024 C.A. No.8648/2024 C.A. No.8634/2024 C.A. No.8651/2024 C.A. No.8653/2024 C.A. No.8637/2024 C.A. No.8654/2024 C.A. No.8658/2024 C.A. No.8661/2024 C.A. No.8638/2024 C.A. No.8659/2024 C.A. No.8660/2024 C.A. No.8662/2024 C.A. No.8655/2024 C.A. No.8664/2024 T.P.(C) No.767/2023 C.A. No.9253/2024 C.A. No.8702/2024 C.A. No.8667/2024 Page 2 of 112 C.A. No.8666/2024 C.A. No.8843-8844/2024 C.A. No.8668/2024 C.A. No.8678/2024 C.A. No.8680/2024 C.A. No.8679/20...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
2024 INSC756REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE/ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.2948 OF2023Chief Commissioner of Central Goods and Service Tax & Ors. Appellants versus M/s Safari Retreats Private Ltd. & Ors. Respondents with WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NOS. 804 of 2022 & 1030 of 2022 CIVIL APPEAL No.2949 OF2023WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NOS. 1036 of 2022 & 90 of 2023 WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.846 of 2023 and WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.847 of 2023 JUDGMENT ABHAY S. OKA, J.FACTUAL ASPECTS1 The issues which broadly arise in this group of matters concern clauses (c) and (d) of sub-section (5) of Section 17 of Civil Appeal No.2948 of 2023 etc. Page 1 of 91 the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (the CGST Act). There is a challenge to the constitutional validity of the said provision. There is a prayer for reading down the said provision.2. In Civil Appeal Nos. 2948 and 2949 of 2023, the first respondent is engaged in the construction of a shopping mall for the purpose o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE2024INSC751IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.OF2024(Arising out of SLP(C) No.33094 of 2017) KHALSA UNIVERSITY AND ANOTHER APPELLANT(S) VERSUS THE STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT B.R. GAVAI, J.1. Leave granted.2. The present appeal challenges the final judgment and order dated 1st November 2017 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in C.W.P. No.17150 of 2017 (O&M), whereby the High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellants inter-alia seeking a writ in the nature of certiorari praying for quashing The Khalsa University (Repeal) Act 2017 dated 17th July 2017. 1 FACTS:3. The facts giving rise to this appeal lie in a narrow compass. 3.1. In the year 2010, the State of Punjab framed the Punjab Private Universities Policy, 20101. 3.2. The Khalsa College Charitable Society, Amritsar,2 (appellant No.2 herein), which was in existence since 1892, submitted a proposal ...
Tag this Judgment!