Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: karnataka prohibition of beggary act 1975 chapter i preliminary Court: supreme court of india Page 3 of about 38 results (0.240 seconds)

Anoop Baranwal Vs. Union Of India Ministry Of Law And Justice Secretar ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... constitutionalism. the country feels agonised when money and muscle power become the supreme power. substantial efforts have to be undertaken to cleanse the polluted stream of politics by prohibiting people with criminal antecedents so that they do not even conceive of the idea of entering into politics. they should be kept at bay. it would appear ..... pending before subordinate court. this court's power under article 142(1) to do complete justice is entirely of different level and of a different quality. any prohibition or restriction contained in ordinary laws cannot act as a limitation on the constitutional power of this court. once this court has seisin of a cause or matter ..... in states (1) for every state there shall be a legislature which shall consist of the governor, and (a) in the states of bihar, madhya pradesh, maharashtra, karnataka and uttar pradesh, two houses: (b) in other states, one house (2) where there are two houses of the legislature of a state, one shall be known as .....

Kaushal Kishor Vs. The State Of Uttar Pradesh Govt. Of U.p. Home Secre ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... snobbish attitude in the portrayal of certain ethnic, linguistic and regional groups. similarly, the advertising code under rule 7 of the cable television networks rules, 1994 prohibits the carriage of advertisements on the cable service which hurt the religious susceptibilities of subscribers, which derides any race, caste, colour, creed or nationality, or incite ..... liability recourse to ordinary courts of law is indispensable.114. quoting from wade and phillips on constitutional law, this court pointed out in the state of karnataka (supra) that responsibility to parliament only means that the minster may be compelled by convention to resign.115. the extent to which the enforcement of ..... of a civil suit under article 131, to the appointment by the central government, of a commission of enquiry against the chief minister of karnataka, had an occasion to consider the exposition of the words collective 108 (1977) 4 scc608139 responsibility appearing in article 164(2). after indicating .....

State of Karnataka Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR2001SC1560; JT2000(6)SC1; 1999(4)SCALE332; (2000)9SCC572

..... almatti of 524.256 m. we hasten to add that at the same time there cannot be any injunction or prohibition to the said state of karnataka for having the dam height at almatti upto 519.6 m which would be in the interest of all concerned ..... and c(iv) of this clause.79. the aforesaid clause v, no doubt is in a negative form, prohibiting the state of maharashtra and state of karnataka from using in any water year more than the water that has been allotted in their favour respectively but by no ..... decision of the tribunal, we find nothing stated therein which even can be held to be a prohibition or restriction on the power of the state of karnataka to have the height of dam up to a particular height. in this view of the matter ..... of such waters or the implementation of such agreement; or(iii) the levy of any water-rate in contravention of the prohibition contained in section 7.keeping in view the aforesaid salient features of the constitutional scheme and the relevant provisions of the disputes .....

Mrs. Maneka Gandhi Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1978SC597; (1978)1SCC248; [1978]2SCR621

..... 992. the question which arose for determination in this case related to the constitutional validity of section 6 of the subversive activities control act, 1950. this section prohibited the use of passports by communists following a final registration order by the subversive activities control board under section 7 and following the mandate of this section, the ..... of america-analysis and interpretation-at page 1171)215. in herbert aptheker etc. y. secretary of state 378 u.s. 500, the court struck down a congressional prohibition of international travel by members' of the communist party. in a subsequent decision the court upheld the government's refusal to issue passports for travel to cuba, ..... such expression in the united states.these observations were quoted with approval by hegde, j., (as he then was) speaking on behalf of a division bench of the karnataka high court in dr. s. s. sadashiva rao v. union of india 1965 mysore law journal, p. 605 and the learned judge there pointed out that ' .....

S.P. Gupta Vs. President of India and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1982SC149; 1981Supp(1)SCC87; [1982]2SCR365

..... to their appellate jurisdiction but indeed over all courts and tribunals throughout their territorial jurisdiction. further, unlike the government of india act the constitution has not prohibited the high courts from enjoying original jurisdiction in matters concerning the revenue or concerning any act ordered or done in the collection thereof. the framers of the ..... justice of india informed the prime minister that he was trying to explore the possibility of recommending the appointment of the senior-most puisne judge of the karnataka high court, shri k. bhimiah, as chief justice of kerala high court, in the penultimate paragraph of the letter the chief justice of india reiterates ..... '. justice khalil ahmed from patna to orissa as cj7. justice a. t, harries from punjab to calcutta as cj8. justice s.r. dasgupta from calcutta to karnataka high court9. justice ansari from andhra pradesh to kerala high court10. justice a.d. koshal from punjab & haryana high court to madras high court.310. apart .....

S.R. Bommai and Others Etc. Etc. Vs. Union of India and Others Etc. Et ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1994SC1918; JT1994(2)SC215; 1994(2)SCALE37; (1994)3SCC1; [1994]2SCR644

..... to patronise a particular religion as state religion overtly or covertly. political party is, therefore, positively enjoined to maintain neutrality in religious beliefs and prohibit practices derogatory to the constitution and the laws. introduction of religion into politics is not merely in negation of the constitutional mandates but also a ..... 357. applying this principle, only the meghalaya case is justiciable and that proclamation was invalid while those relating to madhya pradesh, himachal pradesh, rajasthan and karnataka are not justiciable. there is rightly no challenge to the proclamation relating to uttar pradesh. however, in view of the subsequent elections held in meghalaya ..... and validity of the notification as unjustifiable trespass upon the domain of state powers. while dealing with the issues arising in that suit the state of karnataka v. union of india : [1978]2scr1 , once again examined the relevant provisions of the constitution and the commission of inquiry act, 1952, and .....

State of Punjab and anr. Vs. Devans Modern Brewaries Ltd. and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : JT2003(10)SC485; 2003(10)SCALE202; (2004)11SCC26

..... the imported goods and the similar goods manufactured or produced in that state. the clause deals only with discrimination by means of taxation; it prohibits it. the prohibition cannot be extended beyond the power of taxation. it means in immediate context that states are free to encourage and promote the establishment and growth ..... current era of globalization when the entire philosophy of society, on the economic front, is undergoing vast changes.358. in m.a. murthy v. state of karnataka and ors. : [2003]264itr1(sc) , this court held:'...the doctrine of binding precedent helps in promoting certainty and consistency in judicial decisions and enables an ..... municipal committee and ors. : [1989]3scr1038 . the said view has been reiterated by a constitution bench in islamic academy of education and anr. v. state of karnataka and ors. : air2003sc3724 .178. in indian handicrafts emporium (supra), this court pointed out that judicial vagaries should not be permitted to have its play in such .....

Bandhua Mukti Morcha Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1984SC802; 1984LabIC560; 1983(2)SCALE1151; (1984)3SCC161; [1984]2SCR67; 1984(16)LC29(SC)

..... is guaranteed.(2) the supreme court shall have power to issue directions or orders or writs, including writs in the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warrants and certiorari, whichever may be appropriate, for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by this part.(3) without prejudice to the ..... is guaranteed.(2) : the supreme court shall have power to issue directions or orders or writs, including writ in the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari, whichever may be appropriate, for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by this part.16. while interpreting article 32, it ..... of india based on on the spot studies regarding identification, release of bonded labourers and rehabilitation of freed labourers in uttar pradesh, madhya pradesh, andhra pradesh, karnataka, orissa, bihar, rajasthan, tamilnadu and kerala and the report of the national seminar on 'indentification and rehabilitation of bonded labour' held from 7th to 9th .....

State of Punjab Vs. Davinder Pal Singh Bhullar and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 2012(1)KLT10; AIR2012SCW207; AIR2012SC364; 2012CriLJ1001

..... of the judgment. (see: hari singh mann v. harbhajan singh bajwa & ors., air 2001 sc 43; and chhanni v. state of u.p., air 2006 sc 3051). moreover, the prohibition contained in section 362 cr.p.c. is absolute; after the judgment is signed, even the high court in exercise of its inherent power under section 482 cr.p.c ..... its inherent powers, issues directions contravening the statutory provisions laying down the procedure of investigation, it would be unwarranted in law. 38. in rajan kumar machananda v. state of karnataka, 1990 (supp.) scc 132, this court examined a case as to whether the bar under section 397(3) cr.p.c. can be circumvented by invoking inherent jurisdiction under ..... be exercised only to prevent the abuse of the process of the court and to secure the ends of justice. however, powers can be used provided there is no prohibition for passing such an order under the provisions of cr.p.c. and there is no provision under which the party can seek redressal of its grievance. under the .....

Supreme Court Advocates-on-record Association and Another Vs. Union of ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1994SC268; JT1993(5)SC497; (1993)4SCC441; [1993]Supp2SCR659

..... been contended that on account of the methodology in vogue, the very precious constitutional rights are at stake and need breathing space to survive' and that a prophylactic prohibition on all intrusions of this sort is, therefore, essential.117. all the counsel eloquently raise a debatable question as to how any coarctation be imposed on the ..... gujarat 30 27 3 17 10 1 - - _________________________________________________________________________ 8. himachal pradesh 8 5 3 4 1 - - - _________________________________________________________________________ 9. jammu kashmir 10 9 1 5 4 - - - _________________________________________________________________________ 10. karnataka 30 21 9 12 9 1 2 14 _________________________________________________________________________ 11. kerala 24 23 1 15 8 1 - 8 _________________________________________________________________________ 12. madhya pradesh 30 26 4 17 9 - - - _________________________________________________________________________ 13. madras .....