Keywords:- PIL- difference between judicial review and merit review If the Statute provides for consultation with any person before making recommendation for appointment to any post, consultation with that person has to be made. The question of giving primacy to the opinion expressed by the person with whom the consultation has to be made depends upon various factors. If there is […]
Month: November 2017
KEYWORDS:- Backword Class-Jaat caste The Central List of OBCs prepared for the States of Uttar Pradesh in 1993 did not include the “Jaat” caste/ community. The State of Uttarakhand was formed in 2000. By a Resolution passed in 2010, the National Commission for Backward Classes resolved that till the Central List for the State of Uttarakhand was finalized, the List […]
KEYWORDS:- termination from Service- Compensation -Retrenchment It is trite law that when the termination is found to be illegal because of non-payment of retrenchment compensation and notice pay as mandatorily required under Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, even after reinstatement, it is always open to the management to terminate the services of that employee by paying him the retrenchment […]
Keywords:- DRT-SARFAESI Act Explained Court must have good and sufficient reason to bypass the alternative remedy provided by statute AIR 2010 SC 3413 : (2010) 7 SCALE 696 : (2010) 8 SCC 110 : (2010) 9 SCR 1 : JT 2010 (7) SC 651 (SUPREME COURT OF INDIA) United Bank of India Appellant Versus Satyawati Tondon and OTHERS Respondent (Before […]
It is true that the rule of exhaustion of alternative remedy is a rule of discretion and not one of compulsion, but it is difficult to fathom any reason why the High Court should entertain a petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution and pass interim order ignoring the fact that the petitioner can avail effective alternative remedy by filing application, appeal, revision, etc. and the particular legislation contains a detailed mechanism for redressal of his grievance.
keywords:- regularization of appointment- Temporary appointment One cannot dispute that the State has the power to appoint persons for a temporary period under the Act and Rules framed thereunder and once such power was exercised by the State, the status of such appointee continued to be that of temporary employee notwithstanding grant of some extensions to them for some more […]
The National Litigation Policy expressly stated that the Government must cease to be a compulsive litigant. The philosophy, that the matters should be left to the courts for ultimate decision is to be discarded and the easy approach that “let the court decide”, must be eschewed and condemned. November 23, 2017. section 268A of the Income Tax Act SUPREME COURT […]
Section 52 , Copyright Act, 1957 52. Certain acts not to be infringement of copyright.— (1) The following acts shall not constitute an infringement of copyright, namely:— (a) a fair dealing with a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work 1[not being a computer programme] for the purposes of— (i) Private use including research;] (ii) criticism or review, whether of that work or of […]
1991 Supreme Court of India Judgment Index January 1991 SHER SINGH V. STATE OF HARYANA & ORS [1991] – 1 (8 January 1991) GRIH KALYAN KENDRA WORKERS’ UNION V. UNION OF INDIA & ORS [1991] – 2 (9 January 1991) SUBHASH KUMAR V. STATE OF BIHAR & ORS [1991] – 3 (9 January 1991) SHIVA GLASS WORKS CO. LTD. V. ASSITANT COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE & ORS [1991] – 4 (11 January 1991) STATE […]
it appears to us that although the period of limitation for making an application for restoration of a suit dismissed for default under Order 9 of the Code is thirty days from the date of the order of dismissal, the application for restoration of miscellaneous case arising out of such application under Order 9, when such Misc. Case is dismissed for default, is not governed by the provisions of Art. 122 of the Limitation Act in view of the fact that expressly in terms of the said Art. 122, the miscellaneous case arising out of an application under Order 9 is not attracted and the period of limitation in such case should be governed by Art. 137
You must be logged in to post a comment.