Court : Kerala
Decided on : Jan-15-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALAAT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID WEDNESDAY,THE15H DAY OF JANUARY201425TH POUSHA, 1935 OP(KAT).No. 4221 of 2012 (Z) ---------------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN TA35542012 of KERALAADMINISTRATIVETRIBUNAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED1109-2012 PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS4AND5 - ---------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.2. THE DISTRICT OFFICER, KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, DISTRICT OFFICE, KASARAGOD. BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC, KPSC RESPONDENTS/APPLICANTS4AND6AND RESPONDENTS13: - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. PRASANTH KUMAR, KASARAGOD P.O., KASARAGOD-671121.2. SHEENAPPA.B, BAJA HOUSE, NETTANIYE P.O., MULLERIA VIA, KASARAGOD-671543.3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVE...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jan-14-2014
CR No.151 of 2014 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.151 of 2014 Date of Decision:14. 1.2014 Sukhpal Kaur ......Petitioner Versus The Sunderam Colonizers (Pvt.) Ltd. & Ors. .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR. Present: Mr.Kulbhushan Raheja, Advocate for the petitioner. MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR, J.(Oral) Concisely, the facts and material, which require to be noticed for the limited purpose of deciding the core controversy, involved in the instant revision petition and emanating from the record, are that, initially, petitioner-plaintiff Sukhpal Kaur wife of Harnek Singh (for brevity the plaintiff.) has instituted the civil suit for a decree of mandatory injunction directing defendant-respondents Sunderam Colonizers Private Limited and others (for short the defendants.) to remove the recently constructed pillars and other constructions from the passage/street. The defendants refuted the claim of plaintiff, filed the written...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jan-13-2014
Crl. Appeal No.341-DBA of 2001 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Appeal No.341-DBA of 2001 Date of Decision :13. 1.2014. State of Punjab ...... Appellant Versus Sukhwinder Singh @ Bhap and others ....... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDIP SINGH Present: Ms. Ritu Punj, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, for the appellant-State. Mr. Yogesh Goel, Advocate, for the respondents. KULDIP SINGH, J.The State of Punjab has come up in appeal against the acquittal of accused Baljit Singh, Gurbachan Singh, Amrish Kumar and Jagdish Lal for offence under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC; acquittal of accused Baljit Singh under Sections 307 and 25 of the Arms Act; acquittal of Sukhwinder Singh, Gurbachan Singh, Amrish Kumar and Jagdish Lal under Section 307 read with Section 149 IPC and acquittal of all the accused for offence under Section 148 IPC. Prosecution version is that on 16.3.1999 at about 10:00 P.M. Tejind...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Decided on : Jan-13-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BABU MATHEW P.JOSEPH MONDAY,THE13H DAY OF JANUARY201423RD POUSHA, 1935 OP(KAT).No. 15 of 2014 (Z) --------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OA20462013 of KERALA ADMINISTRATIVETRIBUNAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED0609-2013 PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- JYOTHIKUMAR.D., AGED34YEARS, S/O. DHARMAPALAN, MUPPATHIL, KATTIL MARKET, KUMARAPURAM, HARIPAD, ALAPPUZHA- 688 001. BY ADV. SRI.KALEESWARAM RAJ RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.2. THE DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 033.3. KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, REP. BY THE SECRETARY, KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 004. R1 & R2 BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.NOBLE MATHEW. R3 BY SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Decided on : Jan-13-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BABU MATHEW P.JOSEPH MONDAY,THE13H DAY OF JANUARY201423RD POUSHA, 1935 WA.No. 49 of 2014 () IN WP(C).20259/2006 ------------------------------------------ AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 20259/2006 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED1306-2013 APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS1AND2 --------------------------------------------------------- 1. KERALA STATE SOCIAL WELFARE ADVISORY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, OFFICE OF THE KERALA STATE SOCIAL WELFARE ADVISORY BOARD, SASTHAMANGALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.2. THE CHAIR PERSON, KERALA STATE SOCIAL WELFARE ADVISORY BOARD SASTHAMANGALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM BY ADV. SRI.AJITH KRISHNAN RESPONDENTS/WRIT PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS3& 4: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. RESHMI TILAK W/O.RANJITH PONNAN, UPPER DIVISION CLERK KERALA STATE SOCIAL WELFARE ADVISORY B...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Decided on : Jan-13-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALAAT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BABU MATHEW P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE13H DAY OF JANUARY201423RD POUSHA, 1935 OP(KAT).No. 10 of 2014 (Z) --------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN OA30132013 of KERALAADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED0601.2014 PETITIONERS/APPLICANTS: ------------------------------------------------ 1. SHAINY VARGHESE AGED40YEARS W/O M.M. BAIJU, STAFF NURSE GRADE I, TALUK HOSPITAL PUDUKKAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT RESIDING AT MUTTUVANCHERY HOUSE, VILANG.P.O.,VILANG EDATHALAVIA, ERNAKULAM-683561.2. BINDU C.L. AGED37YEARS W/O. VARGHESE DEVASSY, STAFF NURSE GRADE I PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE, VETTILAPPARA, THRISSUR DISTRICT RESIDING AT VADAKKAL HOUSE, CHAIPANKUZHI.P.O. CHALAKKUDY, THRISSUR-680724.3. K.T. PREETHY AGED41YEARS W/O. THANKAPPAN, STAFF NURSE GRADE I PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE PARIYARAM THRISSUR DISTRICT RESIDING AT IMMATTIPARAMBIL HOUSE ANNANADU.P.O., KADUKUTTY,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Decided on : Jan-10-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY,THE10H DAY OF JANUARY201420TH POUSHA, 1935 WP(C).No. 20215 of 2013 (B) ---------------------------- PETITIONERS:- ---------------------- 1. NABIL M.R.,AGED32YEARS,S/O. M.A.RASHEED, CHEMMANTHOOR, PUNALUR VILLAGE PATHANAPURAM TALUK, PUNALUR MUNICIPALITY, PUNALUR P.O,PIN- 691 305.2. PRAKASHAN,AGED65YEARS, SON OF GOPALAN, PMC IX/129C, PATHANAPURAM TALUK, PUNALUR VILLAGE, PUNALUR MUNICIPALITY, PUNALUR P.O, PIN691305 BY ADVS.SRI.P.B.SAHASRANAMAN SRI.T.S.HARIKUMAR SRI.K.JAGADEESH SRI.RAAJESH S.SUBRAHMANIAN RESPONDENTS:- ------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM695001.2. THE REVENUE DIVISIOMAL OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE RDO AND SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER, CIVIL STATION BUILDING, KOLLAM691001. BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER (REVENUE) SRI.P.K.SOYUZ THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON1001-2014, THE COURT ON THE...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jan-10-2014
..* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Pronounced on: January 10, 2014 CS(OS) 2252/2011 & I.A. No.14617/2011, I.A. No.18553/2011, I.A. No.20143/2011, I.A. No.20144/2011, I.A. No.20167/2011, I.A. No.20762/2011, I.A. No.448/2012 and I.A. No.15808/2012 INSTITUTE FOR INNER STUDIES & ORS ..... Plaintiffs Through Mr. Amit Chadha, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Karan Mehra, Mr. Lalit Jhunjhunwala, Ms. Bahaar Dhawan & Ms. Chandni Goel, Advs. versus CHARLOTTE ANDERSON & ORS ..... Defendants Through Mr. B.B. Sawhney, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Dipak Kumar Jena, Adv. & Ms. Minakshi Jena Ghosh, Adv. for D-1. Mr. Viplav Sharma, Adv. for D-2. Mr.Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Mayank Kshirsagar, Adv. for D-3. Mr. Ajit Pudussery, Adv. with Mr. Dinesh Khurana, Adv. for D-11. Mr. Raghav Awasthi, Adv. for D-14. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. The plaintiffs, (ten in numbers) have filed the present suit seeking declaration, permanent injunction and mandatory injunction alongwith...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Regional Bench Kochi
Decided on : Jan-10-2014
Shrikant Tripathi, Member (J): 1. In all these matters, the question whether the Group Captains (Time Scale) are entitled to be treated at par with the Group Captains (Select) regarding the age of superannuation and as such, are entitled to serve the Air Force up to the age of 57 years in place of 54 years has arisen, therefore, with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, all these cases were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. The applicant, Group Captain Saji Abraham, No.16647, who filed O.A.No.58 of 2013, retired as Group Captain (Time Scale) from the Air Force service during the pendency of the instant petition on 31st May, 2013. He had prayed for a stay against his retirement, but it was denied. However, the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala, in O.P.(AFT) No.1867 of 2013, preserved the rights whatsoever of the applicant. If the age of retirement of this applicant had been 57 years instead of 54 years, he would have continued in service upto 31...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jan-10-2014
Oral Judgment: (Anoop V. Mohta, J.) Leave to amend prayer clause (d). Amendment to be carried out forthwith. Rule, returnable forthwith. Heard finally, in view of the urgency and as the matter is pertaining to the admission, affiliation and career of medical college students. 2. Petitioner No.1, a registered Public Charitable Trust, is running a Medical Collage in the name of Smt. Kashibai Navale Medical College and General Hospital (Petitioner No.2) since 20072008 after fulfilling all requisite requirements in a prescribed standards as required by the Respondents. 3. Respondent No.1 is a Maharashtra University of Health Science Nashik, (for short, "MUHS") which is an examining body. Respondent No.2 is a State of Maharashtra having control over Respondent No.1 and 3. Respondent No.3 is a Directorate of Medical Education and Research, a competent authority for admission to under graduate and post graduate Health Science Courses i.e. MBBS, BDS, MD, MS, MDS etc. Respondent No.4 is a Medic...
Tag this Judgment!