Inquiry - Judgment Search Results

Justice P.D. Dinakaran Vs. Judges Inquiry Committee and anr.

Court: Supreme Court of India

to the Chairman with the prayer that order admitting notice of motion may be withdrawn, order constituting the Inquiry Committee may be rescinded and notice issued by the Committee may be annulled. Simultaneously, he raised an objection

Smt. Kiran Bedi Vs. Committee of Inquiry and anr.

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: AIR1989SC714; 1989CriLJ903; JT1989(1)SC21; 1988(2)SCALE42; (1989)1SCC494; [1989]1SCR20; 1989(1)LC340(SC); MANU/SC/0512/1989

ORDERWhereas the Administrator of the Union Territory of Delhi is of the opinion that a judicial inquiry is necessary into matters of public importance mentioned below; Now therefore, the Administrator is pleased to constitute a

Kiran Bedi and ors. Vs. Committee of Inquiry and anr.

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: AIR1988SC2252; 1989CriLJ303; JT1988(3)SC372; 1988(2)SCALE272; (1988)4SCC49; [1988]Supp2SCR518; 1988(2)LC731(SC)

Delhi Administration has to examine first all its witnesses as required by Rule 5(5)(a) of the Commissions of Inquiry (Central) Rules, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules') framed under the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952 (hereinafter

Krishna Ballabh Sahay and ors. Vs. Commission of Inquiry and ors.

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: AIR1969SC258; 1969(17)BLJR392; 1969CriLJ520; [1969]1SCR387

petition the appellants sought a declaration that a notification of the Governor of Bihar appointing a Commission of Inquiry under the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952, was 'ultra vires' illegal and Inoperative' and for restraining the Commission

T Ramesh Babu Vs. The Inquiry Authority

Court: Karnataka Dharwad

R/O. H. No.99, 3RD CROSS, PADAMARAJ, GOKUL ROAD, HUBBALLI-580030. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VITTHAL S. TELI, ADVOCATE) AND:1. THE INQUIRY AUTHORITY, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD, RO-HYDERBAD, SITTING AT ENKAY COMPLEX, DOOR No.2, FLOOR NO.1, KESHWAPUR, HUBBALLI, DIST:

M/s.Green Global Logistics Vs The Inquiry office

Court: Chennai

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 05-03-2026CORAMTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ and WMP Nos.6809 and 6812 of 2026 M/s.Green Global Logistics, Represented by its Partner Mr.M.Saleem, No.98 /100, East Madha Church Street, Royapuram, Chennai-...

M/s Airtrax Freight Logistics Vs The Inquiry officer / Asst. Commissio ...

Court: Chennai

No.16 First Floor, Muthukumar Nagar Extension Poonamallee, Chennai 600 056 Rep. by its Proprietor R.Murugan ..Petitioner(s) Vs.1. The Inquiry Officer / Asst. Commissioner of Customs, Chennai II (Import) Commissionerate No.60, Rajaji Salai, Customs House, Chennai-600 001.2. The

District Administration Vs. Commissioner of Inquiry and ors.

Court: Guwahati

1. The Government of Meghalaya in exercise of the power conferred by Section 3 of the Commission of Inquiry Act, 1952 (Act No. 60 of 1952) (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), upon forming an opinion about

Amrish N. Patel, Member, Jan Sangarsh Manch Vs. Commission of Inquiry ...

Court: Gujarat

filed Special Civil Application No.12295 of 2009 challenging order dated 18.9.09 passed by respondent No.1 herein, Commission of Inquiry presided by Hon'ble Mr Justice G.T.Nanavati ('Commission' for short). The petition came to be dismissed by learned Single

Central Bureau of Investigation Vs. Kumher Inquiry Commission and ors.

Court: Rajasthan

Reported in: 1995CriLJ3917

J.1. These two connected writ petitions are directed against the common order dated 28-10-1993 passed by the Kumher Inquiry Commission, Jodhpur (Camp-Bharatpur), directing the petitioners to produce :-(1) the case diaries of case Nos. 220, 222, 223,