Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: national security guard act 1986 section 67 summary security guard court Page 1 of about 12,765 results (0.522 seconds)

S. Chaoba Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Guwahati

..... - (1) nothing in this act shall affect the jurisdiction exercisable by, or the procedure applicable to, any court or other authority under the army act, 1950 (45 of 1950), the air force act, 1950 (46 of 1950), the navy act, 1957 (62 of 1957), the border security force act, 1968 (47 of 1968), the coast guard act, 1978 (30 of 1978), and the national security guard act, 1986 (47 of 1986). ..... as such, i do not find any infirmity in the convening of the summary security force court on the ground of infraction of section 74(2) of the b.s.f. ..... mani, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that while convening the summary security force courts, the provisions of section 74(2) of the b.s.f. ..... thereafter, the petitioner along with the aforesaid companion namely, lnk ishu bhai were tried by a summary security forces court on the charges at annexure-a/4 to the writ petition which is reproduced below :-no. ..... it is true that sub-section (2) of section 74 prescribes that when there is no grave reason for immediate action and the reference can without detriment to discipline be made to officer empowered to convene a petty security force court for the trial of the alleged offender, an officer holding a summary security force court shall not try without such reference to any offence punishable under any of the sections, viz. .....

Carlucci Vs. Doe

Court : US Supreme Court

..... 93 certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the district of columbia circuit syllabus after respondent, a cryptographic material control technician at the national security agency (nsa), disclosed to nsa officials that he had engaged in homosexual relationships with foreign nationals, his employment was terminated pursuant to nsa personnel regulations setting forth procedures for removal "for cause," which were promulgated under provisions of the national security agency act of 1959 (1959 nsa act) empowering the secretary of defense, or his ..... court has held that, in light of its summary nature, congress intended 7532 to be invoked only where there is "an immediate threat of harm to the national security'" in the sense that the delay from invoking "normal dismissal procedures" could "cause serious damage to the national security. ..... the court of appeals' view that its construction of 7532 is necessary to provide employees sought to be removed on national security grounds with procedures equivalent to those provided by that section assumes that nsa's ordinary clearance revocation and for cause dismissal procedures are less protective than those guaranteed by 7532, which assumption is not borne out by the record in this ..... section 7532, like 833, applies to a special class of national security cases, and authorizes summary suspension and unreviewable removal at the secretary's personal initiative after a hearing of unspecified ..... of the navy, 802 f.2d 1563, 1568 (1986). ..... 1986) .....

Madhyamam Broadcasting Limited Vs. Union Of India

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... canada (attorney general), 2003 fca246103 section 38.06(1) of the canada evidence act 104 ribic (n102) 102 part h (b) the court must undertake a balancing exercise if the state has proved that the disclosure would be injurious to national security; (iii) the alternative test: whether there are alternatives to full disclosure that would protect a fair trial. ..... order revoking the permission are bereft of reasons and details; (b) in the counter affidavit filed before the high court, mib only contended that the material is sensitive and as a matter of policy, and in the interests of national security, ministry of home affairs does not disclose reasons for the denial ; (c) the division bench of the high court acknowledges that the gravity , impact , nature , and depth of the issue are not discernible from the files ..... plaintiff cannot prove their case prima facie; (ii) if the plaintiff prima facie proves their case but if the privilege deprives the defendant of information that would provide the defendant a valid defence, then the court may grant a summary judgment to the defendant; and (iii) even if the claims might be theoretically established without relying on privileged evidence, it may be impossible to proceed since the privileged evidence is inseparable from the non-privileged ..... union of india, (2017) 10 scc141 (1986) 1 scr103 this passage was quoted with affirmation in the judgment of the constitution bench in modern dental. ..... majesty, (1986), 72 n.r81(scc) 101 ibid. .....

Smt. Ranjana Prashant Rathi Vs. the State of Maharashtra

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1997)99BOMLR284

..... section 11 of cofeposa act and section 14 of the national security act are identical with section 12 pitndps act ..... point of jurisdiction of the detaining authority for passing a fresh impugned order of detention under the national security act, it is stated in para 5 as under:shri manohar, learned advocate general, fairly states that the impugned order cannot be legally supported in view of the fact that the revocation of earlier order was under section 21 of the general clauses act and not under section 11(1) of the n.s. ..... the power conferred under clauses (a) and (b) of sub-section (1) of section 11 is in fact extension of the power recognised under section 21 of the general clauses act and while under the general clauses act, the power is exercisable by the authority making the order, the named authorities under clauses (a) and (b) of section 11(1) of the act are also entitled to exercise the powers of revocation.in para 10, it is observed further:the pronounced judicial view of this court was that repeated orders of detention are not to ..... has concluded that the detenues are involved in a big racket and indulged in illegal trafficking of psychotropic substances by a syndicate, recorded his satisfaction that the detenus need to be detained under the provisions of pitndps act, 1986 to prevent them from engaging in illicit traffic in psychotropic substances.3. ..... kerala : [1986]1scr371 . ..... 1587 : (1986) 2 bcr 545 : 88 ..... maharashtra 1986 cri.l.j ..... maharashtra and others 1986 cri.l.j. ..... 1986 ..... 1986 .....

Air India Limited Vs. P.K. Upadhaya and Another

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 1999(4)ALLMR84; 1999(4)BomCR427; (1999)3BOMLR142; 1999(3)MhLj265

..... for him to seek such other remedy as are available underthe act, for instance, as application under section 33(c)(2) or the workman may resort to the remedy under the payment of wages act, 1986 see punjab beverages v. ..... with industrial disputes already pending should be brought to a determination in a peaceful atmosphere and that no employer should during the pendency of those proceedings take any action of the kind mentioned in the sections which may give rise to fresh disputes likely to further exacerbate the already strained relation between the employer and the workmen.to achieve this object a ban has been imposed upon the ordinary right ..... rukmaji bala andothers, : (1955)illj346sc in the context of section 33 the supreme court has observed as under:'the object of section 22 of the 1950 act like that of section 33 of the 1947 act as amended is to protect the workmen concerned in disputes which form the subject matter of pending proceedings against victimisation by the employer on account of their having raised industrial disputes or their ..... proceedings before a conciliation officer or board, and (b) any proceeding before the arbitrator or labour court, or tribunal or national tribunal in respect of industrial dispute. ..... the workman is not in a position to furnish security and therefore he is unable to withdraw the said ..... the workman was allowed to withdraw the arrears of wages on furnishing security. ..... the workman to withdraw 50% of the amount subject to furnishing the security. .....

V.K. Appliances Vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd.

Court : National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC

..... the complaint is required to be filed within a period of two years, that is, on or before, 03.10.2010, as contemplated under section 24-a of the consumer protection act, 1986, whereas, the present complaint which is been filed today is beyond the period of limitation of about seven months. 5. ..... it must be borne in mind that c p act, 1986, envisages summary procedure and has its own period of limitation. ..... in our opinion, the reasons assigned by the state commission and the national commission, for holding that the complaint was barred by time, are correct. ..... in the instant case, if the delay is condoned, the very purpose and scheme of the c p act, 1986, shall stand defeated. ..... agricultural industries 2009 ctj 481 (sc) (cp) = jt 2009 (4) sc 191, this court, while dealing with the same provision, has held :- 8. ..... d) further, as to whether any legal proceedings in the court of law are to be initiated or otherwise, for that purpose, the same was referred to the advocate, in the month of december, 2010. ..... in para no.13, it has been held by the honble supreme court :- the term cause of action? ..... , 2009 ctj 951 (supreme court) (cp) took view of the observations made in case state bank of india vs. b.s. ..... , the honble apex court, in special leave to appeal (civil) no. ..... the honble apex court in kandimalla raghavaiah and co. vs. ..... this view finds support from the judgments of this court in huda vs. b.k. .....

Aditya Agrawal and Another Vs. Chairman and C.E.O., Honkong and Shangh ...

Court : Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC New Delhi

..... kusum agrawal have filed a joint complaint under section 17 of the consumer protection act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as the act), averring therein that for the purchase of a residential accommodation (no. ..... investigations are done by the police it is customary that internal investigations are done by the bank also to fix responsibility and penalize the officers, agents and servants of the bank entrusted with the charge of a valuable security, if such a security gets misappropriated from their custody but, no such investigations have been done and no officer, servant or agent of the o.p. ..... it is also stated that the opposite party-bank further advised the complainants to deliver the original registration receipt to its representative, so that the same may be kept as security pending collection of the original sale deed from the office of the sub-registrar. ..... , i (2002) cpj 16 (sc)=1986-2002 consumer 5105 (ns), and a recent decision of the honble national commission in case m/s. ..... in our above views we stand fortified by a decision of the honble supreme court in case synco industries v. ..... considering the complex questions of fact involved in the present complaint, it is not possible for us to decide the same in our summary jurisdiction. .....

14 Penn Plaza Llc Vs. Pyett

Court : US Supreme Court

..... in august 2003, with the union s consent, 14 penn plaza engaged spartan security, a unionized security services contractor and affiliate of temco, to provide licensed security guards to staff the lobby and entrances of its building. ..... after 14 penn plaza, with the union s consent, engaged a unionized security contractor affiliated with temco to provide licensed security guards for the building, temco reassigned respondents to jobs as porters and cleaners. ..... although it purports to ascertain the relationship between the age discrimination in employment act of 1967 (adea), the national labor relations act, and the federal arbitration act, the court ignores our earlier determination of the relevant provisions meaning. ..... respondents immediately appealed the ruling under 16 of the faa, which authorizes an interlocutory appeal of an order refusing a stay of any action under section 3 of this title or denying a petition under section 4 of this title to order arbitration to proceed. 9 u. s. c. 16(a)(1)(a) (b). ..... the district court issued a decision, affirmed by the court of appeals, which granted summary judgment to the employer because it concluded that the claim of racial discrimination had been submitted to the arbitrator and resolved adversely to [the employee]. id. , at 43. .....

Brig. V.Jaikumar Vs. Uoi and ors.

Court : Delhi

..... national security guards (nsg) was set up in the year 1984 and is a fully deputationist force. ..... and the officer will be governed in terms of mhas letter no.3/1(i)/(ii)/84-nsg dated 28.05.1985 as amended from time to time.while on deputation with the nsg, the officer shall be governed in accordance with the provisions contained in nsg act 1986 and the rules made there under. ..... if objective facts are shown to the court on which the subjective satisfaction has been taken by the competent authority, the writ court cannot go into the merits of the decision taken. ..... the subject satisfaction of the authority concerned that the said excessive leave taken by the petitioner is hampering the growth of the organization, has to be the subjective satisfaction of the authority concerned and the court cannot substitute the subjective satisfaction of the court on the issue. ..... if the term of deputation is liable to be curtailed, only upon proof of mala-fide, can a writ court interfere if the deputation is curtailed. ..... in other words, it is not the decision but the decision making process which falls for scrutiny of a court.20. .....

Ullas Sahu and Etc. Vs. District Magistrate and ors.

Court : Orissa

Reported in : 1988CriLJ32

..... corpus arise out of the same incident leading to the passing of the impugned orders of detention (annexure-1 to each of the writ applications) by the district magistrate, cuttack, under section 3(2) of the national security act, 1980 (for short 'the act').2. ..... union of india : 1975crilj1648 , a case under the maintenance of internal security act where the provisions for detention are almost identical with the provisions of the national security act.in this case, the relevant observation which is sought to be relied upon reads thus:.furthermore, since the order is based on grounds to be served on the detenu, the order of detention ..... : 1982 cri lj 146 has held that the central government also being empowered to pass an order of revocation, a duty was cast upon it to see that the report received under section 3 or any communication or petition received from the detenu was considered with 'reasonable expedition'.the reasons which were offered in the counter-affidavit for the alleged delay at the state government level ..... made the order of detention under the said section after being satisfied as provided in that section with reference to the remaining ground or grounds.it is, therefore, not possible to accept the contention of shri pasayat that the law mandates the detaining authority to sign the grounds in support of the order of detention simultaneously.the expresssion 'contemporaneous' used in the supreme court decision does not and cannot be construed to ..... 1986 (1) crimes 124 : 1986 .....