Array ( [0] => ..... or the date of expiry of the maximum period allowed for first renewal, whichever is earliest. however, amended rule provided that this shall not apply to renewal under sub section (3) of section 8 of the mmdr act, 1957. further amendments were brought in rule 9 of the said rules. the state government through its letter dated 20.08. ..... to the petitioner, the said letter indicates that the state government had in principle taken a decision to renew mining lease of the petitioner. in the meantime, the indian bureau of mines (in short ibm) gave a report on 28.08.2014 in terms of mc rules 1960 recommending grant of renewal in favour of the petitioner. further ..... mining lease, the petitioner-company submitted an application on 17.12.2009 for grant of renewal of the mining lease. in the meantime, the report of the indian bureau of mines was also received by the state government and the state government itself wrote a letter to the central government opining that the condition contained in section ..... [1] => ..... of the petitioner was granted a mining 2 lease at mosabani on 16.6.1939. under section 3(1) of the indian copper corporation (taking over of management)act, 1972 the management and undertaking of the indian copper corporation limited was taken over and stood transferred to and vested in the central government with effect from 21.09.1972. ..... for 3rd renewal of the mining lease for surda copper mines was submitted on 18.03.2013, which is under consideration of the state government. in view of the amendment in rule 24 a (6) of the mineral concession rules, 1960, a direction was issued to the petitioner to stop mining operations. the application submitted by the ..... surda copper mines can be taken by the state government. 7. in reply, the learned senior counsel for the petitioner submitted that, once a favourable report from indian bureau of mines is received indicating that it would be in the interest of mineral development to grant renewal of the mining lease in favour of the petitioner, all ..... [2] => ..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. ..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. ..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. ..... [3] => ..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. ..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. ..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. ..... [4] => ..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. ..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. ..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. ..... [5] => ..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. ..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. ..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. ..... [6] => ..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. ..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. ..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. ..... [7] => ..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. ..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. ..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. ..... [8] => ..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. ..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. ..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. ..... [9] => ..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. ..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. ..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. ..... ) Indian Boilers Amendment Act 2007 Section 3 Amendment of Section 2 - Court Jharkhand - Year 2014 - Judgments | SooperKanoon Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian boilers amendment act 2007 section 3 amendment of section 2 Court: jharkhand Year: 2014 Page 1 of about 12 results (0.112 seconds)

Dec 11 2014 (HC)

Ms Tata Steel Limited Through Mrs Meena Lall Vs. the State of Jharkhan ...

Court : Jharkhand

Decided on : Dec-11-2014

..... or the date of expiry of the maximum period allowed for first renewal, whichever is earliest. however, amended rule provided that this shall not apply to renewal under sub section (3) of section 8 of the mmdr act, 1957. further amendments were brought in rule 9 of the said rules. the state government through its letter dated 20.08. ..... to the petitioner, the said letter indicates that the state government had in principle taken a decision to renew mining lease of the petitioner. in the meantime, the indian bureau of mines (in short ibm) gave a report on 28.08.2014 in terms of mc rules 1960 recommending grant of renewal in favour of the petitioner. further ..... mining lease, the petitioner-company submitted an application on 17.12.2009 for grant of renewal of the mining lease. in the meantime, the report of the indian bureau of mines was also received by the state government and the state government itself wrote a letter to the central government opining that the condition contained in section .....

Tag this Judgment!
Nov 28 2014 (HC)

Hindustan Copper Limited Through Its General Manager Mines Sri Deb Kum ...

Court : Jharkhand

Decided on : Nov-28-2014

..... of the petitioner was granted a mining 2 lease at mosabani on 16.6.1939. under section 3(1) of the indian copper corporation (taking over of management)act, 1972 the management and undertaking of the indian copper corporation limited was taken over and stood transferred to and vested in the central government with effect from 21.09.1972. ..... for 3rd renewal of the mining lease for surda copper mines was submitted on 18.03.2013, which is under consideration of the state government. in view of the amendment in rule 24 a (6) of the mineral concession rules, 1960, a direction was issued to the petitioner to stop mining operations. the application submitted by the ..... surda copper mines can be taken by the state government. 7. in reply, the learned senior counsel for the petitioner submitted that, once a favourable report from indian bureau of mines is received indicating that it would be in the interest of mineral development to grant renewal of the mining lease in favour of the petitioner, all .....

Tag this Judgment!
Nov 21 2014 (HC)

Kunal Anand Vs. State of Jharkhand and Ors

Court : Jharkhand

Decided on : Nov-21-2014

..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. ..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. ..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. .....

Tag this Judgment!
Nov 21 2014 (HC)

M/S Kamla Aditya Construction Vs. State of Jharkhand and Ors

Court : Jharkhand

Decided on : Nov-21-2014

..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. ..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. ..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. .....

Tag this Judgment!
Nov 21 2014 (HC)

Simplex Infrastructures Limite Vs. State of Jharkhand and Ors

Court : Jharkhand

Decided on : Nov-21-2014

..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. ..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. ..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. .....

Tag this Judgment!
Nov 21 2014 (HC)

Excel Venture Construction Co. Vs. State of Jharkhand and Ors

Court : Jharkhand

Decided on : Nov-21-2014

..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. ..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. ..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. .....

Tag this Judgment!
Nov 21 2014 (HC)

Modi Projects Limited Vs. State of Jharkhand and Ors

Court : Jharkhand

Decided on : Nov-21-2014

..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. ..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. ..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. .....

Tag this Judgment!
Nov 21 2014 (HC)

Niraj Kumar Bhattacharya Vs. State of Jharkhand and Ors

Court : Jharkhand

Decided on : Nov-21-2014

..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. ..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. ..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. .....

Tag this Judgment!
Nov 21 2014 (HC)

Nav Nirman Builders Through Its Managing Partner Vs. State of Jharkhan ...

Court : Jharkhand

Decided on : Nov-21-2014

..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. ..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. ..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. .....

Tag this Judgment!
Nov 21 2014 (HC)

Nav Nirman Builders Vs. State of Jharkhand and Ors

Court : Jharkhand

Decided on : Nov-21-2014

..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. ..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. ..... wholly without jurisdiction, as the provisions of section 24(3)(b) and section 27 of the jharkhand state housing board act, 2000 are not attracted in the present case, has also been made. by filing an amendment application which was allowed, the petitioner has impugned, order contained in letter dated 19.10.2012 and order dated 12. .....

Tag this Judgment!




Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //