Court : Supreme Court of India
G. S. Singhvi, J. 1. These appeals are directed against the order of the Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court whereby the writ petitions filed by the respondents were allowed, Section 32(5A) of the Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976 (for short, `the 1976 Act') was declared as violative of Article 14 of the Constitution, void and inoperative and the conditions incorporated in the orders passed by the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA)sanctioning residential layout plans or work orders in terms of which respondents were required to pay/deposit various charges/sums specified therein were quashed and a direction was issued for refund of the amount. 2. With the formation of the new State of Mysore, it was considered necessary to have a uniform law for planned growth of land use and development and for the making and execution of town planning schemes. Therefore, the State Legislature enacted the Mysore Town and Country Planning Act, 1961 (for short, `the Town Planning Act')....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Surya Kant, J. This order of ours shall dispose of CWP Nos. 17771 of 2003; 14179 of 2010; 18160 of 2011 as the issues involved therein are either interlinked or inter-dependent. Before extracting the facts in extenso from CWP No. 17771 of 2003, it being the oldest, we deem it appropriate to tersely refer to some of the orders passed by different Division Benches, resulting into placement of these cases before a larger Bench even in the absence of a formal reference order. CWP No. 17771 of 2003 2. Sehajdhari Sikh Federation - a registered Political Party has preferred this writ petition statedly in public interest, seeking quashing of the Notification dated 8th October, 2003 issued by the Central Government purportedly in exercise of its powers under Section 72 of the Punjab Re- organization Act, 1966 (in short, `the 1966 Act') whereby Sections 49 and 92 of the Sikh Gurdwara Act, 1925 (in short, `the 1925 Act') have been `amended' to the extent of denying the Sehajdhari Sikhs their righ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2012(1)KLT10; AIR2012SCW207; AIR2012SC364; 2012CriLJ1001
1. Leave granted in the Special Leave Petitions filed by Shri Sumedh Singh Saini. 2. These appeals have been preferred against the orders dated 30.5.2007, 22.8.2007, 5.10.2007 and 4.7.2008 in Crl. Misc. No. 152- MA of 2007; order dated 19.9.2007 in Crl. Misc. No. 86286 of 2007 in Crl. Misc. No. 152-MA of 2007; and orders dated 2.11.2007 and 6.11.2007 in Crl. Misc. No. 93535 of 2007 in Crl. Misc. No. 152-MA of 2007 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. For the sake of convenience of disposal of the appeals, we would refer only to the criminal appeals filed by the State. 3. The Appeals herein raise peculiar substantial questions of law as to whether the High Court can pass an order on an application entertained after final disposal of the criminal appeal or even suo motu particularly, in view of the provisions of Section 362 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter called Cr.P.C.) and as to whether in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction under Section...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1. Delay condoned. 2. Leave granted. 3. The question which arises for consideration in these appeals is whether priority given to the dues payable by an employer under Section 11 of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (for short, `the EPF Act') is subject to Section 529A of the Companies Act, 1956 (for short, `the Companies Act') in terms of which the workmen's dues and debts due to secured creditors are required to be paid in priority to all other debts. 4. For the sake of convenience, we have culled out the facts from the record of the appeal arising out of SLP(C) No. 7642/2011. 5. Messrs Esskay Pharmaceuticals Limited is a company registered under the Companies Act. It falls within the definition of `employer' under Section 2(e) of the EPF Act. On account of the company's failure to pay the dues under the EPF Act for the periods from March 1998 to May 1999 and June 1999 to August 2001, the competent authority passed two orders under Section 7A of th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
1. Sri K.N. Tripathi, Senior Advocate and Sri B.C. Rai, Advocate, have argued on behalf of petitioners. Sri Shashi Nandan, Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Pankaj Shukla, Advocate, have appeared and argued the matter on behalf of respondents no. 1 to 3. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondents 4 and 5 adopted the arguments of Sri Shashi Nandan, Senior Advocate and did not add anything. 2. Since pleadings are complete, as requested and agreed by learned counsel for parties, I proceed to decide under the Rules of the Court at this stage. 3. This writ petition involves certain intricate technical aspects relating to electricity supply, apparatus, particularly energy measuring digital meters, computerized data and print outs. On the request of Sri Shashi Nandan, Senior Advocate, two officials of respondent no. 3 were permitted to explain these technical aspects. They are, (1) Sri K.K. Singhal, Superintending Engineer, Circle Amroha; and (2) Sri Krishan Pal, Executive Engineer (Te...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
1. Controversy has been triggered, prompting filing of all these petitions, as a consequence of the decision of Government of NCT of Delhi in revising the school fee payable by the students studying in various private recognized Schools in Delhi. This decision is contained in order dated 11th February, 2009. Whereas, the parents body representing the students studying in these schools feel that enhancing the fee is unreasonable and without any proper procedure which was required to be followed as per the mandate of law and earlier judgment of this Court as well as the Supreme Court, the Management of these Schools feels otherwise. They are equally dissatisfied with the impugned order dated 11th February, 2009 with a reason just opposite, as according to them, its a meagre enhancement in the fee which fails to match financial burden cast upon the schools as a result of the revision in the pay scale of the Teachers and other staff of the Schools consequent upon implementation of the reco...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1. The constitutional validity of Roerich and Devika Rani Roerich Estate (Acquisition & Transfer) Act, 1996 (in short the Acquisition Act ), the legal validity of Section 110 of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961 (in short Land Reforms Act ), the Notification No. RD 217 LRA 93 dated 8th March, 1994 issued by the State Government thereunder and the scope and content of Article 300A of the Constitution of India, are the issues that have come up for consideration in these civil appeals. 2. We propose to deal with the above issues in three parts. In Part-I, we will deal with the validity of Section 110 of the Land Reforms Act and the validity of the notification dated 8.3.1994 and in Part-II, we will deal with the constitutional validity of the Acquisition Act and in Part-III, we will deal with the claim for enhanced compensation and the scope of Article 300A of the Constitution. PREFACE 3. Dr. Svetoslav Roerich, a Russian born, was an internationally acclaimed painter, artist an...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sri Lanka Supreme Court
Saleem Marsoof, J. This appeal arises from an action for declaration of title filed in the District Court of Anuradhapura in December 1989 by the Petitioner-Respondent-Respondents (hereinafter referred to as •Respondents–), who claimed title to the four acre land named •Palugahakumbura–situated in Mahawela (Pahalabaage) in the Pandiyankulama village, in Nachcha Tulana of Ulagalla Korale in Hurulu Palata in Anuradhapura District in the North Central Province of Sri Lanka, more fully described in the schedule to the joint petition filed by them. They claimed title by virtue of the Deed bearing No. 6165 dated 9th February 1987 (P1) and attested by Lionel P. Dayananda, Notary Public. The said Deed was executed by one Ibrahim Lebbe Noor Lebbai, the purported Attorney for Meydeen Sadakku Mohideen Abdul Cader, under the Power of Attorney bearing No. 7598 dated 30th October 1981 (P7), attested by S.M.M Hamid Hassan, Advocate and Notary Public in the Ramanathapuram Distric...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
1. Whether the Reporters of local papers Yes may be allowed to see the judgment?2. To be referred to Reporter or not? Yes3. Whether the judgment should be Yes reported in the Digest?ORDER.1. The present judgment will dispose of three writ petitions filed by the Indian Olympic Association (the petitioner in W.P. 876/2007, hereafter referred to as "the IOA"), the Sanskriti School, petitioner in W.P. 1212/2007, (hereafter referred to as "the school") and the Organizing Committee of the Commonwealth Games, 2010, Delhi (petitioner in W.P. 1161/2008, hereafter referred to as "the Games Committee"). The common question involved is as to the applicability of the Right to Information Act (hereafter referred to as "the Act"), with broad reference to whether the writ petitioners are "Public Authorit(ies)" within the meaning of the term under Section 2(h) of the said Act. Petitioners facts and contentions:2. Briefly the facts of the case in W.P. 876/2007, filed by the IOA are that the IOA is the a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
1. The common question that arises for consideration in these appeals is whether the learned single Judge is correct in directing the Tamil Nadu State Apex Co-operative Bank to pay 20% of last drawn salary as pension to its retired employees.2.The facts leading to the filing of these appeals are as follows:(a) The Tamil Nadu State Apex Co-operative Bank Limited (shortly "the Bank") is a Co-operative Society registered under the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act. The District Central Co-operative Banks are its Members. The Government of Tamil Nadu also owns substantial shares. There are no private individual members in the Co-operative Society. The Bank has been running profitably.(b) While so, a settlement under Section 12(3) of the Industrial Disputes Act (in short "the Act") was entered into between the Bank and the Tamil Nadu State Apex Co-operative Bank Employees Union (shortly "the Union") on 29.05.1991. Contributory Superannuation Pension Scheme (in short "the Scheme") was in...
Tag this Judgment!