ceased to hold office."
10 The Commissioner, in our view, wrongly held that the
Petitioner has carried out unauthorized construction, considering the
Scheme ... invoking any other specific provisions before taking such action. The
Corporation has wrongly interpreted even the Judgment cited, by
holding that the Judgment passed
Appellant cannot be
permitted to take advantage of his own wrong and/or own action, and
for the pendency of Section 34 Application and thereafter
Appellant cannot be
permitted to take advantage of his own wrong and/or own action, and
for the pendency of Section 34 Application and thereafter
first select list on 1 December
2014 and the subsequent action of allotment of divisions to them. There was no
reason for notifying the second ... action on the part of the Petitioners
to increase the number of vacancies in the select list was also not permissible.
These actions
entertain the present Petition. Even otherwise, the cause
of action has taken place in Mumbai as for the first time the
Petitioner received an email ... February 2016 from the Respondent whereby the Respondent
has wrongly threatened to cancel the MOU in Mumbai.
::: Uploaded on - 06/04/2016 ::: Downloaded
examination, the
Tribunal has passed the impugned order. The whole approach is
wrong and impermissible.
The common challenge by both the parties-
33 The common ... consider the
same, based upon the amended rules and the future action of
promotion, but by the impugned order everything is disturbed and
delayed
examination, the
Tribunal has passed the impugned order. The whole approach is
wrong and impermissible.
The common challenge by both the parties-
33 The common ... consider the
same, based upon the amended rules and the future action of
promotion, but by the impugned order everything is disturbed and
delayed
examination, the
Tribunal has passed the impugned order. The whole approach is
wrong and impermissible.
The common challenge by both the parties-
33 The common ... consider the
same, based upon the amended rules and the future action of
promotion, but by the impugned order everything is disturbed and
delayed
examination, the
Tribunal has passed the impugned order. The whole approach is
wrong and impermissible.
The common challenge by both the parties-
33 The common ... consider the
same, based upon the amended rules and the future action of
promotion, but by the impugned order everything is disturbed and
delayed
examination, the
Tribunal has passed the impugned order. The whole approach is
wrong and impermissible.
The common challenge by both the parties-
33 The common ... consider the
same, based upon the amended rules and the future action of
promotion, but by the impugned order everything is disturbed and
delayed
