Former Secretary Of State Service Officers Conditions Of Service Act 1972 Amending Act 1 Former Secretary Of State Service Officers Conditions Of Service Amendment Act 1975 - Judgment Search Results
Home > Cases Phrase: former secretary of state service officers conditions of service act 1972 amending act 1 former secretary of state service officers conditions of service amendment act 1975 Page 1 of about 146,841 results (0.123 seconds)R.P. Kapur Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Supreme Court of India
Reported in: AIR1964SC787; (1966)IILLJ164SC; [1964]5SCR431
of India and His Majesty's Government in connection with the former Secretary of State's Services. We have already indicated that s. which the Governor could dismiss a member of the former Secretary of State's Services may have crept in by inadvertence, for to the members of what were formerly the Secretary of State's Services in respect of disciplinary matters and stress was laid the Government of India which decided about the continuance in service of such officers of the Secretary of State's Services who taken by the Provincial Government because it was contemplated that officers serving under the Provincial Government would be appointed to their or arrangements' affecting their respective cases, The guarantee about prior conditions of service and the previous statutory safeguards relating to disciplinary amendment of s. 240 (2) of the Government of India Act by the same G.G.O. Section 240 (2) as it originally officers. Reliance in this connection was also placed on the amendment of s. 240 (2) of the Government of India Act certain purposes mentioned therein. Subsections (1) and (2) of s. 10 of the Act read: "(1) The provisions of this Act of (1) [1955] 2 C.R. 541. the respondent on this amendment and it is urged that this shows that appointments of
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTVillianur Iyarkkai Padukappu Maiyam Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Supreme Court of India
Reported in: JT2009(8)SC339; (2009)7SCC561; 2009(8)LC3627(SC)
indicated that he had discussion about the issue with the former Secretary, Ministry of Shipping, who had informed him that it dated June 24, 1997, made a proposal to the Under Secretary (Ports), Pondicherry to examine the issue as to whether it transfer of properties from one sovereign State to another sovereign State. It has no power on the right of Government of an overseas Port Developer and, therefore, would like to offer services for the Port Project in Pondicherry on BDOOT basis. M/s. 24, 2006 issued by the Director of Ports to the officers concerned to prepare list of all the existing moveable and marks out of 100 (This firm had qualified with some conditions).3. M/s. Kvaerner Construction International Ltd. - 73 marks out of courts. Normally, there is always a presumption that the Governmental action is reasonable and in public interest and it is for to all by stating that the Letter of Intent was amended to the respondent No. 11 for oblique motives in order of meetings were held between the officers of respondent No. 11, respondent No. 14 and the officials of Government of Pondicherry to all by stating that the Letter of Intent was amended to the respondent No. 11 for oblique motives in order
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTP. Vaman Rao Vs. Secretary to Government and anr.
Court: Andhra Pradesh
Reported in: [1998]93CompCas486(AP)
S. Dasaradharama Reddy, J.1. The petitioner, a former company secretary of Sirsilk Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1992-93 and 1993-94 and consequently, the petitioner who was former secretary is entitled to claim relief. 6. As regards the year the show-cause notice issued by the second respondent. The petitioner states in his petition as follows : The company was carrying with fine which may extend to Rs. 5,000 and every officer of the company who is in default, shall be liable Board issued earlier an order under section 233B of the Act in respect of cotton textiles and rayon manufactured by the the reasons that are applicable for exemption for the year 1990-91 apply equally to the year 1992-93 and hence no action
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTK.K. Jaggia Vs. State of Punjab Through the Chief Secretary, Punjab
Court: Punjab and Haryana
Reported in: AIR1968P& H97
of what was the right of a member of the former Secretary of State's Services in the matter of suspension, whether what was the right of a member of the former Secretary of State's Services in the matter of suspension, whether as to another Supreme Court decision in S. Partap Singh v. State of Punjab, AIR 1964 SC 72 where in concluding portion that in any case rule 7.2 of the Punjab Civil Services Rules was not applicable to the case of interim suspension only subsistence allowance permissible under the rules applicable to such officers,(b) for the period between the officer's dismissal and his subsequent was supposed to be self-contained and to include all the conditions of service It was not considered sufficient if only the of specific order during the periods when he is not actually detained in custody or imprisoned, provided the charge made or SC 1342 and T. Caiee v. U. Jormonik Siem. AIR 1961 SC 276.5. It was conceded by the learned counsel for
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTF.A.C. Rebello Vs. Co-operative Navigation and Trading Co. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Reported in: AIR1925Bom105; (1924)26BOMLR907; 84Ind.Cas.363
think this is clearly corroborated by the admission of the former secretary of the company, who gave evidence that he knew this is clearly corroborated by the admission of the former secretary of the company, who gave evidence that he knew that result of the voting is not affected. The Chairman has stated in his evidence in effect that he took all possible as new directors and to remove the plaintiffs from their office as directors. Before that resolution was confirmed the present suit the orders of the Court and the Chairman was to act in accordance with the orders of the Court so far (1890) 45 Ch. D. 330 as indicating that if the amendment, which the party has a right to move has been of this company. By a special resolution of May 20, 1923, the company resolved to put in defendants Nos. 3 to should be elected directors. The Chairman refused to accept this amendment on two grounds Firstly, that the terms of the order
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTJ.D. Kapadia Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Gujarat
Reported in: (1971)12GLR938
ceased to apply proprio vigore to the members of the former Indian Civil Service and the purported amendment made in them of 1000/-. If the rate of exchange prescribed by the Secretary of State in Council was less than the official rate urged that the second clause by empowering the Secretary of State to fix a rate of exchange different from the official by the Secretary of State. Each person recruited to this service had to enter into a covenant with the Secretary of of Articles 561 and 983 the petitioner being an Indian officer was entitled to receive only the fixed sum of Rs. observations of Jagannathadas J. in Rajagopalan's Case: '...some of the conditions of service previously governing these persons were continued by Section State earlier disappeared with the passing of the Indian Independence Act, though persons, who continued to serve thereafter under the Indian Indian Civil Service and there was accordingly no question of amending these Articles and the purported amendment made on 29th June no other service or post became obsolete and ineffective from 15th August 1947 when as a result of constitutional changes the such alteration could be made only by means of Constitutional amendment. The result is that the purported amendment of Articles 561
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTShiv Kumar Akela, Advocate S/O Late Shri R.D. Ram, Vs. the Registrar, ...
Court: Allahabad
Reported in: 2007(2)AWC2011
the High Court Bar Association, the remaining lists for the former were not available in the office of the High Court renewed on 16-2-2004 and its renewal is still continued.P.N. Tyagi Secretary24. Learned Counsel representing U.P. Bar Council, submits that the High as an advocate on the roll of more than one State Bar Council.97. Again relevant clause of Model Bye Laws of period consisted of 'Clergy' which was supposed to do public service. Our 'Gown' owes its origin to the 'Gown' of a merely agent of parties pleading a particular case, but are officers of Court expected to assist in the administration of justice, Advocates Act, have been empowered to frame Rules and prescribe conditions subject to which an advocate can be permitted to practise ASSOCIATION ALLAHABAD), which is a Society registered under Societies Registration Act, 1860 (as amended in the State of U.P.). They are is a Society registered under Societies Registration Act, 1860 (as amended in the State of U.P.). They are undisputedly members of and Control by the Bar Council of India.Supervisions and control17... 18... 19... 20... 21... 22... 23... 24(a) When the name of to subordinate Courts as well on similar lines. Till such amendments are effected in the statutory rules, it would be in
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTWasheshar Nath Chadha Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 48(1992)DLT140; 1992(1)DRJ24
unnamed persons and three named persons, namely, S/Shri Martin Ardgo, former President of Bofors A.B. (for short called 'Bofors'), G.P.Hinduja of to para 6.16 of Jpc report wherein the then defense Secretary has given an Explanationn with respect to the increase of be shown while making the credits. The report of Snab states that 'the mode of the payments and other circumstances clearly had as their agents Svenska Inc, Pitco/Moresco/Moineao Sa and Ae Services Ltd. They made no reference whatsoever to these 3 agents request to authorities outside India was conferred on the Investigating Officers also besides the criminal Courts but when the law was Khatri and others (supra). As stated earlier, one of the conditions mentioned in the Mou is that within the limits of any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and Government of Switzerland on 20th February, 1989 and the amended letter rogatory issued on 22nd August, 1990 was based on given to him by the Government of India. However, in 1984 the position changed and the petitioner and other Indian representatives Thus when Cbi itself has relied upon provisions of Criminal Amendment Ordinance. 1944 and under section 4(2) of the said Ordinance. company since 1975 which was taken over by Bofors in 1975-76. He pointed out certain similarities between the agreements signed between
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTM.C. Mehta Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors. on Behalf of Monitoring C ...
Court: Supreme Court of India
Reported in: 2003(4)AWC3334(SC); JT2003(Suppl1)SC391; 2003(7)SCALE636; (2003)8SCC696
persons/officers were collected from different income tax authorities:(i) Ms. Mayawati, former Chief Minister, Uttar Pradesh.(ii) Shri Naseemuddin Siddiqui, the then Minister, Chief Minister which was communicated by Shri P.L. Punia, Principal secretary to the Chief Minister, UP vide his note recorded in reclamation work is done. He further submits that henceforth the State Government would not carry out any further reclamation work except Ishvakoo (India) Private Limited and M/s Consultant Architect and Planner Services Limited (CAPS).11. Income Tax Returns of the following persons/officers were State of U.P. and Central Government would appoint respective inquiry officers for holding inquiry, within a period of seven days from the CBI.(i) CBI would take into consideration all the relevant Acts i.e. IPC/Prevention of Corruption Act and the Water (Prevention and Government and to the concerned Minister dealing with the NPCC. 14. Stand over for four months for report and compliance._
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTIn Re: Sher Singh
Court: Supreme Court of India
Reported in: AIR1997SC906; JT1997(3)SC33; 1997(1)SCALE563; (1997)3SCC216
Singh had thrown hints to this effect even to the former Secretary but in view of clear cut directions he too that such corrections carried out in any answer-sheet by the Secretary was vitiated for any reason. There is no allegation that the Government of India or under the Government of a State.25. In view of Article 319(b), the validity of appointment of appointment as Chairman or any Member of the Union Public Service Commission or as Chairman of any other State Public Service ought on the ground of misbehavior be removed from the office of Member of the Commission.7. Notice was issued to the that his challenge to the manner of maintaining secrecy was actuated by oblique motives.12. Shri L.D. Kataria swears an affidavit to see certain records including the secret documents on 21st June, 1994. The Secretary on that day was on leave. On 22nd
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT- << Prev.
- Next >>