Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: wild life protection act 1972 section 17 restrictions on hunting repealed Court: punjab and haryana Page 1 of about 36 results (0.128 seconds)

Bharthu and ors. Vs. State of Haryana and anr.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : (2000)124PLR524

..... a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned notification dated july 29, 1988 issued under section 18 of the wild life (protection) act 1972 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1972 act') and order of the collector, guhla, dated july 28, 1998 vide which he rejected the objections filed by the petitioners under ..... e., state of haryana, through its secretary to government, department of wild life preservation, issued notification dated july 29, 1988 under section 18 of the 1972 act declaring the area to be a sanctuary for the purpose of protecting, propagating and developing wild life and its environment. the total area acquired is 120 acres with boundaries ..... of the notification dated july 29, 1988 under section 18 of the 1972 act. what has been done by the said notification is to declare the reserved forest area as sanctuaries for the purpose of protecting, propagating and developing wild life and its environment. the petitioners have not challenged the notification by which the .....

Hem Chand and ors. Vs. State of Haryana and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : (1993)105PLR192

..... prevent environment degredation and to avoid traffic and human health hazards, keeping in view the forests and wild life notification dated 10.2.1988. a notification dated 9.6.1992 was issued under the environment (protection) act, 1986, as well as the rules framed thereunder, by which the following parameters were fixed.that ..... was amended vide notification annexure p7, laying down parameters for controlling the pollution. the vires of the environment (protection) act, 1986 are not under challenge. the powers have been categorically delegated to the state vide annexure rule 1 to issue the impugned notification. thus, ..... entire state has been declared to be crushing zone and the petitioners are entitled to get licence subject to the parameters prescribed under the environment (protection) act, 1986. the state of haryana undisputedly in exercise of the powers delegated by the central government in 1988 has issued notification annexure p2, which .....

ishwar Singh Vs. State of Haryana and Others

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1996P& H30

..... and 7/92 dated the 9th june, 1992. now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by section 5 of the environment (protection) act, 1986, read with government of india, ministry of environment and forests, department of environment, forests and wild life, notification no. s.o. 152(e) dated the 10th february, 1988 and in pursuance of the provisions of section 7 of the ..... said act and rule 4 of the environment (protection) rules 1986 and all other powers, enabling him inthis behalf, the governor of haryana hereby makes .....

Darshan Singh and Others Vs. State of Punjab and Others

Court : Punjab and Haryana

..... comprising in different birs (forest land). it has dense forest and various types of wild and ferocious animals live in the forest area. as per the provisions of various environmental laws, forest act, 1927, forest conservation act, 1980 and wild life (protection) act, 1972, the forest area and the wild life has to be protected. for that purpose officers at different levels are deployed. the common grievance of the petitioners ..... in the writ petition is that the wild and ferocious animals are causing damage to the life, property and crops of nearby villages. therefore, it .....

Charat Singh and Others Vs. Chief Wild Life Warden (Punjab) and Anothe ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

..... .(2012)10 scc303 this petition is allowed and complaint no.32-a dated 27.2.2013 for offences under sections 9, 39, 49, 50, 51 of the wild life (protection) act, 1972 and the subsequent proceedings, including order dated 4.12.2013 passed by sub divisional judicial magistrate, dasuya on the basis thereof, are quashed. (r.p.nagrath ..... (oral) this petition has been filed for quashing complaint no.32-a dated 27.2.2013 for offences under sections 9, 39, 49, 50, 51 of the wild life (protection) act, 1972 and the subsequent proceedings, including order dated 4.12.2013 passed by sub divisional judicial magistrate, dasuya on the basis of written compromise arrived at between the parties ..... court of punjab and haryana at chandigarh crm no.m-621 of 2014 (o&m) date of decision: 15.07.2014 charat singh and others ...petitioners versus chief wild life warden (punjab) and another ...respondents coram: hon'ble mr.justice r.p.nagrath present: mr.k.s.dadwal, advocate for the petitioners.mr.mikhail kad, aag, .....

Present: Mr. R.S.Dhull Advocate Vs. Pooja Dhull ...Petitioner

Court : Punjab and Haryana

..... ecosystem with other related benefits for the ecology of sultanpur national park through controlling the excess grasses. in bhindawas wildlife sanctuary offenders are booked under wild life (protection) act, 1972. respondent no.4, i.e.u.t.chandigarh, has submitted that there is no notified wetland in u.t.chandigarh but all ..... sultanpur national park, as being a fenced/walled area, bhindawas wildlife sanctuary which is an open area is protected through regular patrolling of the staff. however, offenders are booked under the wild life (protection) act, 1972.b.grazing: no problem of cattle grazing inside national park except some abandoned cows which are in ..... the department of forests and wildlife preservation, whereas keshopur is community reserve and managed by management committee constituted under section 36d of the wildlife (protection) act, 1972 and all other wetlands are managed by different authorities under supervision of punjab state council for science and technology. in respect of .....

High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Vs. M/S. Atma Tube Products Ltd. a ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

..... act 37. motor transport workers act 38. customs act 39. the warehousing corporations act 40. the unit trust of india act 41. the food corporation act 42. payment of bonus act 43. monopolistic and restrictive trade practices act 44. contract labour (regulation and abolition) act 45. antiquities and art treasures act 46. architects act 47. limestone and dolomite mines labour welfare fund act 48. payment of gratuity act 49. wild life (protection) act 50. foreign exchange regulation act ..... 51. esso (acquisition of undertakings in india) act 52. water (prevention and .....

Deepak Kumar Vs. State of Punjab

Court : Punjab and Haryana

..... instant petition under section 438 cr.p.c.for grant of anticipatory bail in criminal complaint no.01 dated 03.04.2010, under sections 9, 39, 51 and 52 of wild life protection act, 1971, police station garshankar, district hoshiarpur. learned counsel for the petitioner contended that no fir has been registered against the petitioner nor any complaint has been filed against him. only .....

Jaswant Singh and ors. Vs. the State of Haryana and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : (2008)149PLR389

..... building the canal was embarked upon without taking necessary clearance from the central government and particularly from central water commission, as it is the requirement of the environment protection act, 1986 and the notification dated 27.1.1994.73. the state of haryana has produced before us letter dated 1.9.2006 by which necessary clearance has ..... the district of madurai in tamil nadu before its construction. similarly krishnaraja sagar dam which has turned mandya district which was once covered with shrub forests with wild beasts into a prosperous one with green paddy and surgarcane fields all around.77. in view of the law laid down by the supreme court in the aforementioned ..... to be completed very shortly.29. it was next contended by the learned advocate general for the state of haryana that the allegations of mala fide are wild and vague and the court should take a serious view of the same as the allegations have been made recklessly without impleading the chief minister as a party .....

State of Punjab and ors. Vs. Ram Singh

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1980P& H18

..... relevance at all to the issue. it is plain that at the very threshold it is first to be determined whether the impugned section 32-bb(2) of the act is saved and protected under article 31a of the constitution and, therefore, immune from any challenge under articles 14, 19 or article 31. the weighty argument of mr. i. s. ..... crucial and indeed the only question which would first arise is whether the impugned provisions of section 32-bb (2) of the act is a law falling within the ambit of legislation for agrarian reforms and consequently protected by articles 31a(1)(a).7. at the very outset, however, it may be first noticed that herein admittedly the procedural requirement ..... with the object of agrarian reform.9. once it is held as it must be that the act in general and section 32-bb particular is directed to agrarian reforms then it inevitably follows that the same would immediately attract the protective cloak of article 31a(1)(a). the only ground on which the learned single judge chose to .....