Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: karnataka krishna basin development authority act 1992 chapter 5 finance accounts and audit Page 8 of about 1,435 results (0.286 seconds)

Sakinala Hari Nath and ors. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 1993(3)ALT471

..... become part of the state of andhra pradesh with effect from 1-11-1956 faced certain difficulties in regard to their service conditions: the region itself was backward requiring immediate development. the a.p. administrative tribunal order itself was issued by the president under article 371d. the events leading to the enactment of constitution (32nd amendment) act, 1973 by which article ..... guard against the possibility of inconsistent decisions on points of law by different division benches that the rule has been evolved in order to promote consistency and certainty in the development of the law and its contemporary status, that the statement of the law by a division bench is considered binding on a division bench of the same or lesser number .....

Channala Ramachandra Rao Vs. State of A.P. and Others

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2000(2)ALD652; 2000(2)ALT655

..... of chairpersons of the municipalities in the state subject to such rules as may be prescribed. in g.o. ms. no.36, municipal administration & urban development (elecs.ii) department, dated 3-2-1995, the government has issued rules for the manner of reserving offices of chairpersons to the municipalities. as the stage ..... to publish the population figures, call for objections and after considering the objections, if any, publish the final figures in the district gazette. the district collector, krishna district published the figures (draft) on 6-2-1995. notification was published on the notice boards of the district collector's office, municipal office and local ..... arrayed as respondents i and 4 respectively. the other respondents are the election authority-cum-commissioner of jaggaiahpet nagar panchayat (respondent no.2), the district collector, krishna (respondent no.3) and union of india (respondent no.5).6. the main contention in the affidavit is that pursuant to insertion of article 243-t .....

Pritish Ranjan Roy and ors. Vs. State of Tripura and ors.

Court : Guwahati

..... (supra) had the occasion to deal with the following rulings of the supreme court on the subject: -delhi development horticulture employees' union (supra) and : (2003)iillj359sc s.m. nilajkar and ors. v. telecom, district manager, karnataka.51. in : (1999)iillj187sc rajendra and ors. v. state of rajasthan and ors., where the termination of ..... cannot be ignored.75. following : (1996)illj870sc morinda co-operative sugar mills ltd. v. ram kishan, the supreme court in anil bapurao kanase v. krishna sahakari sakhar karkhana ltd. and anr. (1997) 10 scc 5999 observed that the termination/disengagement of seasonal worker deployed in chemistry section of sugar factory when ..... . this view stand fortified by the judgment of the supreme court in p. virudhachalam and ors. v. management of lotus mills and anr. : (1998)illj389sc , krishna district, co-operative marketing society ltd. v. n.v. puranchandra rao and ors. : (1987)iillj365sc and vikramaditya pandey v. industrial tribunal and anr. 2001 air scw .....

Executive Engineer, Yavatmal Medium Project Division and anr. Vs. Anan ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 1998(4)ALLMR201; (1998)IILLJ77Bom; 1998(3)MhLj897

..... the question of regularizing them would not arise. even otherwise the apex court now in a large number of judgments, which are already referred to earlier including delhi development horticulture employees' union (supra), madhyamik siksha parishad, u.p. (supra), state of himachal pradesh (supra), has clearly defined the scope under which the courts can ..... and consequently, the irrigation department is not an industry. reliance has been placed on the judgment of the apex court in the case of executive engineer. state of karnataka v. k. somasetty & ors., reported in : (1997)iillj698sc . it is contended that the apex court has held that the irrigation department of state is not ..... not take out the irrigation department outside the purview of the definition of industry. the concept of industry was decided on the dominant nature test evolved by krishna iyer, j. the apex court in para 14 thereafter noted that in the event of the definition of industry being changed either by enforcement of the .....

Nellimarla Jute Mills Karmika Sangham Vs. State of A.P. and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 1994(2)ALT223; (1995)ILLJ507AP

..... factory. thereafter, the management of the company again declared lock-out on july 5, 1993. the government of andhra pradesh issued g.o. rt. no. 1464, women's development child welfare and labour (lab.i) department, dated july 27, 1993 under clause (d) of sub-section (1) of section 10 of the industrial disputes act, 1947 ..... here again we may point out that mandamus cannot be denied on the ground that the duty to be enforced is not imposed by the statute. commenting on the development of this law, professor de smith states: 'to be enforceable by mandamus a public duty does notnecessarily have to be one imposed by statute. it may be ..... the writ petition,' it is also relevant to note the decision of thesupreme court in shiv shanker dal mills v.state of haryana : [1980]1scr1170 , whereinv.r. krishna iyer, j., held as follows referringto american jurisprudence:'article 226 grants an extraordinary remedy which is essentially discretionary, although founded on legal injury. it is perfectly open for .....

J. Sameerana Vs. A.P. State Council for Higher Education and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 1998(2)ALD460; 1998(2)ALT113

..... of the decisions rendered by the supreme court in unnikrishnan j.p v. state of ap., : [1993]1scr594 and 4 cases of t.m.a. pai foundation v. state of karnataka, : air1994sc13 , (1994) 4 scc 728, : air1994sc2372 , : air1996sc2652 ,a scheme was evolved by the supreme court which has become the law of the land, and adopted by the state of andhra ..... and sri venkateswara university area and they are shortly called au area, ou area and svu area in the context of local area, au area comprises of the districts of krishna, srikakulam, visakhapatnam, west godavari, east godavari, guntur and prakasam; ou area comprises of the districts of adilabad, hyderabad (erstwhile hyderabad district split into hyderabad and raiiga reddy districts) karimnagar, khammam .....

Mineral Area Development Authority Etc. Vs. M/s Steel Authority Of Ind ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... authorities thereof. ]. 220 sandur manganese & iron ores ltd v. state of karnataka, (2010) 13 scc1[39]. 221 sayyed ratanbhai sayeed v. shirdi nagar panchayat, (2016) 4 scc631222 meerut development authority v. association of management studies, (2009) 6 scc171[67]. 100 part ..... of state ........... 134 7 e. any limitation can extend to prohibition ........................................................ 135 f. impact of taxes on mineral rights on mineral development ............................. 142 i. scope of entry 49 ................................................................................................. 146 i. land system in india ........................................................................................ 146 ii. tax on land and buildings ..... 1, 51, 54, 66 42 a l s p p l subrahmanyan chettiar v. muthuswami goundan, (1940) 2 fcr188 a s krishna v. state of madras, 1957 scr399[8].; 43 k c gajapathi narayan deo v. state of orissa, (1953) 2 scc178[11]. .....

The Karnataka Housing Board Vs. The State Of Karnataka

Court : Karnataka

..... road, bengaluru 560 009. represented by its commissioner.2. the special land acquisition officer, karnataka housing board, cauvery bhavan, kempegowda road, bengaluru 560 009. appellants (by sri. basavaraj .v.sabarad, advocate) and:1. the state of karnataka, housing & urban development department, m.s.building, 2 dr.ambedkar road, bengaluru 560 001. represented by its ..... stations, hospitals, dispensaries, banks, burial and cremation grounds and sites for public purposes of other kinds.].19. preparation and submission of annual housing programme and land development programme budget and establishment schedule. (1) before the 25 first day of december in each year, the board shall prepare and forward, (i) a programme ..... presumption raised by section 4 has to be rebutted by proof and not by mere explanation which may be merely plausible (state of assam vs. krishna rao air1973sc28. therefore, we reiterate the object and purpose of sub- section (2) of section 24 of the act is the requirement of a .....

M/S Evershine Monuments Vs. The State of Karnataka

Court : Karnataka

..... . the primary contention canvassed in the aforesaid case was, as to, whether 2013 act would be applicable to acquisitions initiated under the provisions of the karnataka urban development authorities act, 1987 (kuda act) and bda act. if the answer to the same was in the affirmative, then the acquisition proceeding in the ..... this land as per provisions of land acquisition act. apportionment of compensation amount:- the above compensation amount is apportioned as under:- as per final notification sri krishna setty is the notified person. he has not filed any petition claiming title and interest on the land. sriyuth ramaiah claim title and interest on the land ..... was pursuant to the award dated 27.02.1984.84. learned senior counsel, sri vijay shankar, contended that even if the name of the original owner, krishna setty was mentioned in the acquisition notifications, it was ramaiah and other members of his family who filed a claim petition before the special land acquisition officer (slao .....

J Venkatesh Reddy Vs. The State of Karnataka

Court : Karnataka

..... (technical cell), commerce and industries department, vidhana soudha, bangalore - 560 001. the karnataka state industrial and infrastructure development corporation, represented by its managing director, bengaluru. [cause title amended vide court order dated 26.9.2016]. ... respondents (by shri. krishna s. dixit, central government counsel for respondent nos.1 and 2; shri aditya sondhi ..... to a]. declare that the provisions of section 3[1]. of chapter ii and provisions of sections 28 to 31 of the karnataka industrial areas development act 1966 [karnataka act no.18/1966]. as unconstitutional being repugnant and inconsistent with the provisions of right to fair compensation and transparency in land acquisition ..... of chapter- ii relating to declaration of any area in the state as an industrial area, by the state government under the karnataka industrial areas development act, 1966 (karnataka act no.18/1996) and also the provisions of sections 28 to 31 in chapter vii in the said act relating to .....