Public Use - Judgment Search Results

St. Louis and San Francisco Railroad Co. Vs. Public

Court: US Supreme Court

ST. LOUIS & SAN FRANCISCO RAILROAD CO. v. PUBLIC - 239 U.S. 655 (1915) U.S. Supreme Court ST. LOUIS

State of Missouri, Ex Rel. Washington University Vs. Public

Court: US Supreme Court

ex rel. ST. LOUIS BREWING ASSOCIATION, plaintiff in error, v. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF MISSOURI and Union Electric Light & Power

The Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P. Vs. Gamini Bala Koteswara Ra ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2008(1)ALD(Cri)1; 2008(1)ALT(Cri)72

With regard to testimony of an injured witness, the learned Public Prosecutor relied on a decision in Nagarjit Ahir v. State of investigation after due deliberations and therefore, it cannot be used to corroborate the evidence of P.W. 1. The basis for

A.P. Public Service Commission Vs. Prasada Rao and ors.

Court: Supreme Court of India

and which is contained in the official records of the Public Service Commission is restored and that appointment shall be given

Sahota Public School, Basi Machhian, Tehsil Zira, District Ferozepur V ...

Court: Punjab and Haryana

Reported in: 2012(1)RCR(Civil)628

Lok Adalat is for deciding the disputes in matters of public utility service and the term 'public utility service' is also

Delhi Public School and anr. Vs. Director of Education and ors.

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2002IIIAD(Delhi)421; 97(2002)DLT118

respondents 3 to 5 with the Chairman of the Delhi Public School Society, on 5th of May, 1998, by an emergent

Union Public Service Commission Vs. Dr. Mahesh Mangalat

Court: Delhi

as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies, the disclosure of any such information that invades

United Public Workers Vs. Mitchell

Court: US Supreme Court

the political world. If the possibility exists that some other public employees may, by reason of their more influential positions, coerce the Federal Government, or any agency or department thereof, to use his official authority or influence for the purpose of interfering

Public Utilities Comm'n Vs. Pollak

Court: US Supreme Court

forth the following as one premise for its conclusions: "A public opinion survey was conducted by Edward G. Doody & Company, was ordering an investigation to determine whether the installation and use of such receivers was "consistent with public convenience, comfort and

Committee for Public Education Vs. Nyquist

Court: US Supreme Court

of Education of New York, et al. v. Committee for Public Education & Religious Liberty et al.; and No. 72-929, Cherry entanglement aspect of the three-part test because assuring the secular use of all funds requires too intrusive and continuing a relationship