Court : US Supreme Court
Sheet Metal Workers v. EEOC - 478 U.S. 421 (1986) U.S. Supreme Court Sheet Metal Workers v. EEOC, 478 U.S. 421 (1986) Local 28 of the Sheet Metal Workers' International Association v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission No. 84-1656 Argued February 25, 1986 Decided July 2, 1986 478 U.S. 421 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT Syllabus In 1975, the District Court found petitioner union and petitioner apprenticeship committee of the union guilty of violating Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by discriminating against nonwhite workers in recruitment, selection, training, and admission to the union. The court ordered petitioners to end their discriminatory practices, established a 29% nonwhite membership goal, based on the percentage of nonwhites in the relevant labor pool in New York City, to be achieved by July 1981, and also ordered petitioners to implement procedures designed to achieve this goal under the supervision of a cou...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
$~ *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Reserved on :22. d May, 2018 Date of decision :4. h August, 2018 + W.P.(C) 8125/2016 & CM No.3362/2016 FEDERATION OF OKHLA INDUSTRIAL ASSOCIATION (REGD.) versus LT GOVERNOR OF DELHI AND ANR ........ RESPONDENTS ....... Petitioner + W.P.(C) 12088/2016 & CM Nos.9316/2017, 10386/2017 & 14678/2017 APEX CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY OF NCT DELHI ........ Petitioner LT. GOVERNOR OF DELHI & ANR ........ RESPONDENTS versus versus DELHI FACTORY OWNERS' FEDERATION ....... Petitioner LT. GOVERNOR OF DELHI & ANR. + W.P.(C) 2658/2017 & CM No.11560/2017 + W.P.(C) 3360/2017 & CM No.14703/2017 ....... RESPONDENTS AUTOMOBILE TRADERS ASSOCIATION OF DELHI LT GOVERNOR OF DELHI AND ANR ........ RESPONDENTS ........ Petitioner versus + W.P.(C) 3385/2017 & CM No.14800/2017 + W.P.(C) 3684/2017 & CM No.16236/2017 versus COLORWHEEL LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR & ANR ....... RESPONDENTS ........ Petitioner SEVEN SEAS HOSPITALITY PVT LTD ........ Petitioner versus WP(C) 521...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.8129 of 2022 Madhyamam Broadcasting Limited Appellant Versus Union of India & Ors. Respondents With Civil Appeal No.8130 of 2022 And with Civil Appeal No.8131 of 2022 JUDGMENT Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, CJI This judgment consists of the following sections: A. Facts .................................................................................................................. 4 B. Submissions .................................................................................................... 15 1 C. Issues .............................................................................................................. 19 D. Requirement of security clearance for renewal of permission ......................... 21 E. Judicial Review on procedural grounds ........................................................... 26 E. 1 Principles of natural justice: purpose and content....................................
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment Delivered on :05. 03.2015 CRL.A.124/2013 REKHA SHARMA .. Appellant .. Respondent Versus CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellant For the Respondent : Mr. Arvind Chaudhary, Advocate : Ms. Rajdipa Behura, SPP with Ms. Monica Gupta and Ms. Nidhi Sharma, Advocates CRL.A.152/2013 RAKSHA JINDAL .. Appellant .. Respondent Versus CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellant For the Respondent : Mr. Vikas Pahwa, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Atul Bhuchar, Advocate : Ms. Rajdipa Behura, SPP with Ms. Monica Gupta and Ms. Nidhi Sharma, Advocates CRL.A.159/2013 NIRMAL DEVI .. Appellant .. Respondent Versus CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellant For the Respondent : Ms. Geeta Luthra, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Jatin Sehgal and Ms. Naina Dubey, Advocates : Ms. Rajdipa Behura, SPP with Ms. Monica Gupta and Ms. Nidhi Sharma, Advocate...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.4823 OF 201.(Arising out of SLP(C) No.20180 of 2010) K. Guruprasad Rao ....Appellant versus State of Karnataka and others ....Respondents JUDGMENT G.S. SINGHVI, J.1. Leave granted.2. With the hope of their immortalization, several Emperors, Kings and other rich people got built temples, churches, mosques and other buildings in different parts of the world including India. Many of these structures are not only marvels of architecture, but also represent the culture and heritage of the particular place and period. With the passage of time, these structures acquired the status of historical monuments, the preservation and protection of which has become a herculean task for successive generations. Legislations in other countries 3. The issue of preservation and protection of ancient and historical monuments has been a matter of concern for the Governments and private individuals alike. In his work titled ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.10972 OF2013(Arising out of SLP (C) No.15436 of 2009) Suresh Kumar Koushal and another ... Appellants versus NAZ Foundation and others ... Respondents with CIVIL APPEAL NO.10974 OF2013(Arising out of SLP(C) No.37703 of 2013 @ CC NO.13105 of 2009) CIVIL APPEAL NO.10986 OF2013(Arising out of SLP(C) No.37708 of 2013 @ CC NO.14042 of 2009) CIVIL APPEAL NO.10981 OF2013(Arising out of SLP(C) No.37705 of 2013 @ CC NO.19478 of 2009) CIVIL APPEAL NO.10983 OF2013(Arising out of SLP(C) NO.20913 of 2009) CIVIL APPEAL NO.10984 OF2013(Arising out of SLP(C) NO.20914 of 2009) CIVIL APPEAL NO.10975 OF2013(Arising out of SLP(C) NO.22267 of 2009) CIVIL APPEAL NO.10973 OF2013(Arising out of SLP(C) NO.24334 of 2009) CIVIL APPEAL NO.10985 OF2013(Arising out of SLP(C) NO.25346 of 2009) CIVIL APPEAL NO.10976 OF2013(Arising out of SLP(C) NO.34187 of 2009) CIVIL APPEAL NO.10980 OF2013(Arising out of SLP(C) NO.36216 of 2009) CI...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE THE AG.CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ASHOK BHUSHAN & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY,THE17H DAY OF NOVEMBER201426TH KARTHIKA, 1936 WP(C).No. 26691 of 2010 (J) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- 1. PLANTERS FORUM, APRIVATE TRUST REGISTERED UNDER THE INDIAN TRUSTS ACT, 1882 HAVING ITS OFFICE IN DOOR NO.5/214 BYE PASS ROAD, ERANHIPALAM, CALICUT-673 006, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.2. DR.CHUMMAR CHANDY, PULICAKATHAARA HOUSE, KANJIRAPILLY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR,SENIOR ADVOCATE ADVS. SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS SRI.P.GOPINATH SRI.RAJ PANJWANI SRI. C.U.SINGH,SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI. SANJAY UPADHYAY RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,SECRETARIAT.P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1.2. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, FOREST & WILD LIFE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRE...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.OF2021[ARISING OUT OF SLP (CIVIL) No.12489/2020]. IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. APPELLANT(S) VERSUS PEARL BEVERAGES LTD. RESPONDENT (S) JUDGMENT K.M. JOSEPH, J.1. Leave granted.2. An accident, which took place on 22.11.2007 involving a car (a Porsche) belonging to the respondent-Company, which was insured with the appellant, has resulted in this appeal against the Order by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC for short). The car was completely damaged. The appellant 1 repudiated the claim by the respondent. The question which arises in this Appeal is, whether the NCDRC is correct in holding that the appellant is not entitled to invoke the shield of Clause (2c) of the Contract of Insurance, under which, it was not liable, if the person driving the vehicle, was under the influence of intoxicating liquor, or drugs. The State Commission rejected the complaint of the re...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.5145 OF2016AVITEL POST STUDIOZ LIMITED & ORS. APPELLANTS VERSUS HSBC PI HOLDINGS (MAURITIUS) LIMITED RESPONDENT AND CIVIL APPEAL No.5158 OF2016HSBC PI HOLDINGS (MAURITIUS) LIMITED APPELLANT VERSUS AVITEL POST STUDIOZ LIMITED & ORS. RESPONDENTS WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.9820 OF2016JUDGMENT R.F. Nariman, J.1. These two appeals being Civil Appeal No.5145 of 2016 by Avitel Post Studioz Ltd. [Avitel India]. and its promoters [the Jain family]., 1 and the cross appeal being Civil Appeal No.5158 of 2016 by HSBC PL Holdings (Mauritius) Ltd. [HSBC]., impugn the interlocutory judgment and order passed in the appeal under section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 [1996 Act]. dated 31.07.2014. To dispose of the said appeals, we refer to the facts in Civil Appeal No.5145 of 2016. The brief facts necessary to appreciate the controversy that arises in the present case are as follows: (i) On 21.04.2011, a Sh...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
(Prayer in Crl.R.C.No.34 of 2015:- Petition filed under Section 397 r/w. 401 of Cr.P.C, praying to set aide the order, dated 02.12.2014, made in C.M.P.No.2717 of 2014 in D.V.No.7 of 2014, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Ambattur. in Crl.R.C.No.43 of 2015:- Petition filed under Section 397 r/w. 401 of Cr.P.C, praying to set aide the order, dated 02.12.2014, made in C.M.P.No.1291 of 2014 in D.V.No.7 of 2014, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Ambattur.) 1. Crl.R.C.No.34 of 2015, is against the order, dated 08.01.2015, C.M.P.No.1291 of 2014 in D.V.No.7 of 2014, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ambattur, by which, the petition filed by wife/mother, under Section 21 of the Domestic Violence Act, to grant interim custody of the minor child, Sanjana to her, till the disposal of the main petition, has been allowed. 2. Crl.R.C.No.43 of 2015, is against the order, dated 02.12.2014, C.M.P.No.2717 of 2014 in D.V.No.7 of 2014, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistra...
Tag this Judgment!