Court : Supreme Court of India
"REPORTABLE" IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.5862 OF2007A. Raghu, son of Rajaiah ... Appellant versus Govt. of Andhra Prdesh & others ... Respondents WITH CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 6002-6005 OF2007Vasam Surender, son of Veeraswamy & others ... Appellants versus Govt. of Andhra Prdesh & others ... Respondents JUDGMENT Jagdish Singh Khehar, J.1. It is not a matter of dispute, that the conditions of service including the manner and method of determining seniority in the cadre of Sub-Inspectors of Police, in the State of Andhra Pradesh, are regulated by the Andhra Pradesh Police (Civil) Subordinate Service Rules (hereinafter referred to as, the Service Rules), notified on 26.8.1959, read with the Special Rules notified on 14.12.1990. Learned counsel for the rival parties are agreed, that the issue of seniority (which is the pointed issue of dispute between the rival parties in the present appeals), is to be determined under rule 15 of the said rules, whic...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.7130 OF2003Regional Deputy Director Appellant(s) VERSUS Zavaray S. Poonawala & Ors. Respondent(s) JUDGMENT A.K.SIKRI,J.The first respondent herein wanted to import into India a trophy of one stuffed leopard which he shot in Zambia. Leopard is a protected and prohibited specie under Schedule I of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 and also under the Convention of International Trade on Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). Therefore, requisite permission under the aforesaid provisions is needed to import such a trophy. Respondent No.1 had, in fact, applied for such permissions, the details whereof and the outcome thereof will be mentioned at a later stage, at the relevant place.2. To put it in nutshell here, the CITES had refused to grant the permission. However, the High Court vide impugned judgment dated 28.04.2003 has come to the conclusion that the authorities which were required to...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
"REPORTABLE" IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 2485-2490 OF2010Dhole Govind Sahebrao & others ... Appellants versus Union of India & others ... Respondents WITH CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 2491-2503 OF2010Union of India & others ... Appellants versus A. Karunanithi ... Respondent WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.2577 OF2010Union of India & others ... Appellants versus Awadhesh Kumar & others ... Respondents WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.10386 OF2013Union of India & others ... Appellants versus Issac Varghese & others ... Respondents JUDGMENT Jagdish Singh Khehar, J.1. The present controversy is yet another seniority dispute amongst employees of the Customs and Central Excise Department. The controversy herein has emerged on account of a reconstitution of cadres. In the first instance, a separate cadre was constituted, out of the existing ministerial cadre, for discharging electronic data processing responsibilities. This was necessitated by the decision of the department to...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL Nos. 516-518 OF2010S. SATYANARAYANA .... APPELLANT VERSUS ENERGO MASCH POWER ENGINEERING & CONSULTING PVT. LTD. & ORS. .... RESPONDENTS1JUDGMENT S. A. BOBDE, J.These Criminal Appeals are preferred by the complainant against the Judgment of the High Court of Judicature of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad by which the High Court has in exercise of powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short Cr.P.C.) quashed the proceedings in CC No.37 of 2008 on the file of the court of the Special Judge for Economic Offences at Hyderabad insofar as the accused Nos. A4, A5, A6, A9 and A10 are concerned.2. The complainant i.e. the appellant herein lodged a private complaint in his capacity as a Promoter Director of Sri Satyanarayana Power Private Ltd.-. a company incorporated to generate biomass based power project in the District of Warangal in the State of Andhra Pradesh (hereinafter referred to ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.2381 OF2007STATE OF U.P .........APPELLANT Vs. CHARAN SINGH .........RESPONDENT JUDGMENT V.GOPALA GOWDA, J.This appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment and final order dated 18.07.2006, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.2588 of 1998, whereby the High Court has upheld and modified the Award passed by the Industrial Tribunal dated 24.02.1997 in Adjudication Case No.139 of 1992. The factual matrix and the rival legal contentions urged on behalf of the parties are briefly stated hereunder with a view to find out whether the impugned judgment and order of the High Court warrants interference by this Court in exercise of its appellate jurisdiction. The respondent was appointed as a temporary Tube-well Operator w.e.f. 06.03.1974 by the Assistant Director of Fisheries Department, Meerut (U.P). His services were terminated vide letter dated 22.08.1...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
"REPORTABLE" IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.3194 OF2015(Arising out of SLP (C) No.20379 of 2006) Ved Mitter Gill ... Appellant versus Union Territory Administration, Chandigarh and others ... Respondents WITH TRANSFERRED CASE (C) NO.41 OF2010TRANSFERRED CASE (C) NO.42 OF2010TRANSFERRED CASE (C) NO.43 OF2010TRANSFERRED CASE (C) NO.44 OF2010JUDGMENT Jagdish Singh Khehar, J.1. Through this common order we propose to dispose of the Special Leave Petition (C) No.20379 of 2006 as well as the Transferred Case (C) Nos. 41- 44 of 2010. The aforesaid transferred cases were pending before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as 'the High Court'). Whilst the Special Leave Petition (C) No.20379 of 2006 came to be filed before this Court assailing the order dated 1.5.2006 passed by the High Court in Civil Writ Petition No.5682 of 2006. The prayer for transfer was premised on the fact that the transferred cases were co...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.10091 OF2010PVR LIMITED ...APPELLANT VERSUS STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.10092 OF2010PVR LIMITED ...APPELLANT VERSUS THE FILMS DIVISION & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.10093 OF2010UNION OF INDIA ...APPELLANTS VERSUS PVR LIMITED & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT RANJAN GOGOI, J.1. The appellant - PVR Limited - in Civil Appeal Nos. 10091 of 2010 and 10092 of 2010 is engaged in the business of exhibiting movies at various locations across the country including Bangalore. The appellant operates eleven (11) theaters in a multiplex at Bangalore for which it has been granted necessary permissions/approvals as well as requisite licence for exhibition by the 2nd respondent i.e. District Magistrate, Bangalore. The appellant had filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka challenging, inter alia, a communication dated 2nd April, 2005 issued by the Princip...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS.3177-3178 OF2015(ARISING OUT OF SLP (C) NOS.26770-26771 OF2011 |MOHAN SINGH GILL & ORS. ETC. |.....APPELLANT(S) | |VERSUS | | |STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS. ETC. |.....RESPONDENT(S) | W I T H CIVIL APPEAL NOS.3179-3180 OF2015(ARISING OUT OF SLP (C) NOS.26779-26780 OF2011 W I T H CIVIL APPEAL NO.3181 OF2015(ARISING OUT OF SLP (C) NO.13124 OF2012 A N D CIVIL APPEAL NO.3182 OF2015(ARISING OUT OF SLP (C) NO.17407 OF2012 JUDGMENT A.K. SIKRI, J.Leave granted.2) These appeals arise out of the common judgment dated April 29, 2011 passed by High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh whereby number of writ petitions which were filed challenging the acquisition of land measuring 192.75 acres vide two notifications, both dated 10.08.2009, issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') were dismissed. As a consequence, validity of the notifications has been upheld, ho...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
'REPORTABLE' IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.9043 OF2003AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAX OFFICER & ANR. ... Appellants VERSUS GOODRICKE GROUP LTD. & ANR. ... Respondents JUDGMENT R. F. Nariman, J.An interesting question is raised in this appeal which arises out of two judgments of this Court, namely, 'Buxa Dooars Tea Company Ltd. and others v. State of West Bengal and others' [(1989) 3 SCC211 and 'Goodricke Group Ltd. and others v. State of W.B. and others' [1995 Supp.(1) SCC707. In the present appeal, we are concerned with The West Bengal Rural Employment and Production Act, 1976 and The West Bengal Primary Education Act, 1973. The High Court has found, based on a reading of the interim orders passed in both Buxa Dooars Tea Company Ltd.'s case and Goodricke Group Ltd.'s case, that for the period prior to the Amendment Act of 1989, the respondent herein is entitled to a refund of the cess paid by it together with interest at 12 per cent per annum, and ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOs.4684-4685 OF2005DASHMESH EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS PUNJAB URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S) WITH SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No.19226 of 2013 & SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No.20235 of 2013 JUDGMENT RANJAN GOGOI, J.1. The plaintiff in civil Suit No.65 of 2001 i.e. Dashmesh Education Society has preferred these appeals against the common order dated 12.10.2004 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in RSA Nos. 4328 and 4345 of 2002. By the aforesaid order, the decree passed by the trial court in favour of the plaintiff, which was affirmed in first appeal, has been reversed by the High Court.2. Civil Suit No.65 of 2001 was filed seeking a declaration that the Application dated 21.8.1998 filed by the plaintiff before the defendants seeking permission for setting up a Country Club/Resort at village Karoran, Tehsil Kharar, District Ropar is deemed to have been a...
Tag this Judgment!