Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: unlawful activities prevention act 1967 Page 96 of about 15,830 results (0.090 seconds)

Prakash Chandra Vs. The Commissioner, Bruhat Banglaore Mahanagara Pali ...

Court : Karnataka

..... 320, he may make a provisional order requiring the owner of the building to demolish the work done, or so much of it as, in the opinion of the commissioner, has been unlawfully executed, or make such alterations as may, in the opinion of the commissioner, be necessary to bring the work into conformity with the act, rules, bye-laws, directions or requisitions as aforesaid, or with the plans or particulars on which such permission or orders was based and may also direct that until ..... unfortunately, despite repeated judgments by this court and the high courts, the builders and other affluent people engaged in the construction activities, who have, over the years shown scant respect for regulatory mechanism envisaged in the municipal and other similar laws, as also the master plans, zonal development plans, sanctioned plans, etc. ..... zoning and building regulations are also legitimised from the point of view of the control of community development, the prevention of overcrowding of land, the furnishing of recreational facilities like parks and playgrounds and the availability of adequate water, sewerage and other governmental or utility services. ..... according to the petitioner, respondents 1 to 3 colluded with the 4th respondent, and did not prevent construction of the illegal building, but assisted the 4th respondent in the erection of the building contrary to the sanction accorded, and when objections were filed did not consider the same. .....

Dr.shivamurthy Murugha Sharanaru Vs. State Of Karnataka

Court : Karnataka

..... (ii) section 3 of the statute prohibits use of any religious institution or its premises for promotion of political activity, harboring of any accused/convict or for storing arms & ammunitions; it also bars commission of any unlawful or subversive acts or any act which promotes disharmony, hatred, enmity or ill-will between communities/groups of people. ..... rural police, chitradurga directing framing of charges against the petitioner for the offence that are made penal u/s.376(2)(n), 376(da), 376(3), 201, 506 r/w sec.34 and37of ipc and sec.5(l) and6of pocso act2012sec.3(1)(w)(i)(ii), 3(2)(v)(v-a) of sc/st (poa) act and sec.3(f), 3(c), 3(5) and7of religious institution (prevention of misuse) act, 1988 and sec.75 of juvenile justice (care and protection of children) act2015and futher be pleased to quash the charge sheet and further proceedings. ..... in special case (pocso) no.181 of 2022 and 182 of 2022 registered for offences punishable under sections 376(2)(n), 376da, 376(3), 201, 506 r/w 34 & 37 of the ipc, section 5(l) & 6 of the pocso act, 2012 ( pocso act for short), section 3(1)(w)(i)(ii), 3(2)(v)(v-a) of the scheduled castes/scheduled tribes (prevention of atrocities) act, 1989 ( the atrocities act for short), section 3(c), 3(f), 3(5) and 7 of the religious institutions (prevention of misuse) act, 1988 ( the 1988 act for short) and section 75 of the juvenile justice (care and protection of children .....

United States Vs. Sealy, Inc.

Court : US Supreme Court

..... 350 appeal from the united states district court for the northern district of illinois syllabus the united states brought this civil action for violation of 1 of the sherman act against appellee, the owner of the trademarks for sealy branded mattresses and bedding products which it licensed manufacturers in various parts of the country to produce and sell under a territorial allocation ..... the territorial restraints were a part of the unlawful price-fixing and policing activities of sealy operating as an instrumentality of the licensees and constituted "an aggregation of trade restraints" which was illegal per se. ..... in the second place, this unlawful resale price-fixing activity refutes appellee's claim that the territorial restraints were mere incidents of a lawful program of trademark licensing. ..... government's theory of this case in the district court was essentially that the allocation of territories by sealy to its various licensees was unlawful per se because, in spite of these other legitimate activities, sealy was actually a "front" created and used by the various manufacturers of sealy products "to camouflage their own collusive activities. . . . ..... the reason is that territorial divisions prevent open competition, and where they are effected horizontally by manufacturers or by sellers who in the normal course of things would be competing among themselves, such restraints are immediately ..... argued april 20, 1967 decided june 12, 1967 388 u.s. ..... 350 (1967) united states ..... 350 (1967) .....

Golden State Bottling Co., Inc. Vs. Nlrb

Court : US Supreme Court

..... short answer to petitioners' argument might appear to be that, because the board's supplemental order to all american required only reinstatement and backpay, and not that all american cease and desist from future unlawful activity, no injunctive relief was ordered, and therefore rule 65(d) need not be considered. ..... which provides that injunctions and restraining orders shall be binding only upon the parties to the action, their officers, agents, servants, employees, and attorneys, and upon those persons in active concert or participation with them who receive actual notice of the order, does not bar judicial enforcement of the nlrb order running to all american, since a bona fide successor, acquiring, ..... equitable balance among the conflicting legitimate interests of the bona fide successor, the public, and the affected employee for purposes of effectuating the national labor policies of avoiding labor strife, preventing a deterrent effect on the exercise of rights guaranteed employees by 7 of the nlra, and protecting the victimized employee, such policies being achieved at a relatively minimal cost to the bona fide successor. pp. ..... that 10(c) does not limit the board's remedial powers to the actual perpetrator of an unfair labor practice, and thereby prevent the board from issuing orders binding a successor who did not himself commit the unlawful act. ..... (1967); ..... (1967); ..... finally, in 1967, in yet another turnabout, the ..... 1967), ..... 1967 ..... 14 (1967); see generally developments in the law ..... 1967) .....

Hoffman Estates Vs. the Flipside, Hoffman Estates

Court : US Supreme Court

..... to any commercial speech interest implicated, the ordinance's restriction on the manner of marketing does not appreciably limit appellee's communication of information, except to the extent it is directed at commercial activity promoting or encouraging illegal drug use, an activity which, if deemed "speech," is speech proposing an illegal transaction, and thus subject to government regulation or ban. ..... under this test, appellee had ample warning that its marketing activities required a license, and by displaying a certain magazine and certain books dealing with illegal drugs physically close to pipes and colored rolling paper, it was in clear violation of the guidelines, as it was in selling "roach ..... , if arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement is to be prevented, laws must provide explicit standards for those who apply ..... of items that have some lawful as well as unlawful uses is not an irrational means of discouraging drug ..... because we assume that man is free to steer between lawful and unlawful conduct, we insist that laws give the person of ordinary intelligence a reasonable opportunity to know what is prohibited, so that he may act accordingly. ..... is expressly directed at commercial activity promoting or encouraging illegal drug use ..... [ footnote 2 ] the ordinance makes it unlawful for any person "to sell any items, effect, paraphernalia, accessory or thing which is designed or marketed for use with illegal cannabis or drugs, as defined by illinois revised statutes, without obtaining a .....

Bill Johnson's Restaurants, Inc. Vs. NLRB

Court : US Supreme Court

..... if petitioner's other claims have been finally adjudicated to be lacking in merit, on remand, the board may reinstate its finding that petitioner acted unlawfully by prosecuting these unmeritorious claims if the board adheres to its previous finding that the suit was filed for a retaliatory purpose. ..... similarly, in the present case, the alj found that petitioner's suit lacked a reasonable basis, and then concluded from this fact that the suit violated the act because it was "an attempt to penalize helton for having filed charges with the board, and to penalize the other defendants for assisting helton in her protest of the unfair labor practice committed against her. ..... as the board has observed, by suing an employee who files charges with the board or engages in other protected activities, an employer can place its employees on notice that anyone who engages in such conduct is subjecting himself to the possibility of a burdensome lawsuit. ..... in clyde taylor itself, the board found no unfair labor practice despite the alj's specific finding that the employer's lawsuit "was for the purpose of preventing his employees from exercising the rights guaranteed to them under the act, rather than for the purpose of advancing any legitimate interest of his own. ..... even if a state has some interest in entertaining frivolous lawsuits or providing unreasonable juries, that interest need not prevent swift, effective vindication of federal labor policy. .....

Twa Vs. Flight Attendants

Court : US Supreme Court

..... the central question in this railway labor act (rla) case is whether it is unlawful for a carrier to refuse to reinstate employees who supported a strike until its end ("full-term strikers") solely because the carrier chooses to retain in its active workforce employees who returned to work before the strike ..... the court's suggestion that the rla provides employees no express protection against discrimination on the basis of levels of support for union activities leads the court to limit the rla's force to whatever protections this court is willing to "imply" from the rla's general ..... applicable here, and suggests that a carrier's refusal to reinstate strikers -- conduct which, on its face, violates 2 fourth because of its tendency to influence adversely employees' willingness to support strikes -- is unlawful if the refusal was not truly necessary for the continued operation of the carrier during the strike. ..... prospects for achieving a 'peaceable settlement' of this dispute will remain in jeopardy so long as the striking employees are prevented from working by the presence of the newly-hired replacements. ..... -379 (1967); belknap, ..... 1005 (1967) (interpreting general seniority provisions of collective bargaining agreement as applicable ..... 180 (1967), quoting wellington, union democracy and fair representation: federal responsibility in a federal ..... (1967), ..... 379 (1967) (employers have " legitimate and substantial business justifications' for refusing to reinstate employees who engaged in an ..... 1967 ..... 1967 .....

Rutan Vs. Republican Party

Court : US Supreme Court

..... surely a principal reason for the statutes that we have upheld preventing political activity by government employees -- and indeed the only substantial reason, with respect to those employees who are permitted to be hired and fired on a political basis -- is to prevent the party in power from obtaining what is considered an unfair advantage in ..... 2/7 ] i use the term "misuse" deliberately, because the entire rationale for patronage hiring as an economic incentive for partisan political activity rests on the assumption that the patronage employee filling a government position must be paid a premium to reward him for his partisan services ..... 373, i note only that many commentators agree more with justice scalia's admissions of the systemic costs of patronage practices -- the "financial corruption, such as salary kickbacks and partisan political activity on government-paid time," the reduced efficiency of government, and the undeniable constraint upon the expression of views by employees, post at 497 u. s. ..... feel a significant obligation to support political positions held by their superiors, and to refrain from acting on the political views they actually hold, in order to progress up the career ladder. ..... suppose a state made it unlawful for an employee of a privately owned nuclear power plant to criticize ..... 609 -610 (1967), we held a law affecting appointment and retention of teachers invalid because it premised employment on an unconstitutional restriction of political belief ..... (1967) .....

In Re: Jayantilal Nathubhai Parekh

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1949Bom319; (1949)51BOMLR653

..... not because the district magistrate was satisfied as required by section 2, sub-section (1), that the applicant was acting in a manner prejudicial either to the public safety or the maintenance of public order or the tranquillity of the city of ahmedabad as the order mentioned, but in order to prevent the applicant, who is the secretary of the kisan sabha of ahmedabad, from carrying on the legitimate activities of that sabha and also of the communist party of india of which the applicant is a member. ..... it stated, in the second instance, that the applicant was not inciting agricultural labourers to resort to violence against landlords and he was also not inciting his associates and followers to form unlawful armies, because there were no agricultural labourers in ahmedabad and the applicant has not got any followers or associates. ..... because rightly or wrongly the detenu is charged with collecting arms unlawfully with the object of raising a private army.it is obvious, therefore, that the learned judges did not have specially to consider the question as to whether an order which was based only upon two grounds which had ..... he had also incited his associates and followers to form an unlawful army, by which we understand a private army. ..... there was material before him upon which he was satisfied in effect that the applicant was inciting agricultural labourers to resort to violence against landlords, and that he was also inciting his associates or followers to form an unlawful army. .....

Naiknaware and Associates and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2006(5)MhLj488

..... commissioner being satisfied that the erection of any building or execution of such work as described in section 254 has been unlawfully commenced or is being unlawfully carried on in order to exercise the powers under section 267 therefore the construction has to be one contemplated by section 254 of the bpmc act.section 254 of the act empowers a person to apply for permission to make addition to a building or alteration in the building and provides for ..... as the case may be, a regulated area for purposes of mining operation or construction or both.it will be seen from the above that the government is first required to issue notice of its intent to prohibit construction activities in and around protected monuments and after considering the objections are invited, issue final notification under rule 32 of the rules of 1959.14. ..... is satisfied that the erection of any building or the execution of any such work as is described in section 254 has been unlawfully commenced or is being unlawfully carried on upon any premises, he may, by written notice, require the person, directing or carrying on such erection or execution ..... directing or carrying on such erection or execution shall be removed from such premises by any police officer and may cause such steps to be taken as he may consider necessary to prevent the re-entry of such person on the premises without his permission. ..... the notification cannot be relied upon preventing any construction around agakhan palace without there being a .....