Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents amendment act 2002 section 32 amendment of section 67 Year: 1991 Page 43 of about 422 results (0.244 seconds)

Mar 14 1991 (HC)

Ramanjit Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Others

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Mar-14-1991

Reported in : AIR1991P& H284

ORDER1. The petitioner appeared in the joint Entrance Test conducted by the Punjab School Education Board on 16th September, 1990, under a scheme prepared for admission to the Industrial Training Institutes throughout the State of Punjab, for the two-year Diploma Course. The petitioner opted for the Electrician Trade under Cate-gory-I, Set No. 3. He being a grandson of a freedom fighter, claimed admission against a seat falling in the quota reserved for children of freedom fighters.2. According to the merit list of the test, the name of the petitioner was shown at number 1 in the reserve category meant for children of freedom fighters. However, due to the disturbed conditions, prevailing in the State, interviews fixed for 26th and 27th of October, 1990, had to be postponed and. intimation to that effect was published in the daily newspaper 'Punjab Kesri' of Jaland-. har, on 25th October, 1990, as all the colleges,, I.T.Is. and Polytechnics in District Jalandhar had been closed till 27t...

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 09 1991 (HC)

S.K. Gulati Vs. Punjab State Tubewell Corpn. Ltd. and anr.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Jul-09-1991

Reported in : (1992)IILLJ173P& H

Jawahar Lal Gupta, J. 1. There are six posts in the rank of Superintending Engineer in the Punjab State Tubewell Corporation, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Corporation'). All the six posts have been filled up by taking officers on deputation from the State Government. The petitioner claims that under the Bye-laws of the Corporation, he was eligible and yet his name was arbitrarily ignored. The petitioner complains that 100 per cent diversion of posts to the source of deputations is violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. Is it so?2. A few facts deserve to be noticed. The petitioner was selected and appointed as an Assistant Engineer in the Corporation in September, 1972. On March 21, 1980 the petitioner was given the current duty charge of the post of Divisional Engineer. He passed the departmental professional examination in June, 1980 and the revenue examination in the year 1981. With effect from January 7, 1982, the petitioner was promoted to the post of Divisional E...

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //