SCALE (1)169
ACT:
Constitution of India, 1950-- Articles 310(1) & 311 (2)
(b)-- Power exercisable by President/Governor--Not on person-
al satisfaction
ALLAHABAD 169
Author: R.S. Pathak
Bench: R.S. Pathak
JUDGMENT
Pathak, J.
1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioners
Bandhua Mukti Morcha vs Union Of India & Others on 16 December, 1983
Equivalent citations
safety-razors and hairpins etc. These articles were held not to be articles of cosmetics or toilet requisites. It is not necessary to notice them ... opinion of the learned Judges of the Madras High Court the other articles mentioned in entry 51 were such as were intended to make
New Bihar Biri Leaves Co. & Ors vs State Of Bihar & Ors on 6
District Magistrate, Jabalpur and
Another , [1975] 4 SCC 164 at 167 and 169, The Barium
Chemicals Ltd. & Anr. v. The Company Law Board ... ORIGINAL/CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Writ Petition
(Criminal) No. 296 of 1986.
Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.
with
Special Leave Petition (Criminal
consideration in that case are formulated in
the majority judgment at page 169 as Questions I and II. The
majority referred to the mode ... prescribed
by section 354 (5) of the Code violates the provisions of
Article 21 was not considered specifi-
15
cally by the majority
consideration in that case are formulated in the majority judgment at page 169 as Questions I and II. The majority referred to the mode ... prescribed by Section 354(5) of the Code violates the provisions of Article 21 was not considered specifically by the majority as in independent issue
FACLR 317, (1987) 2 SCJ 358, 1987 (3) SCC 169, (1987) 4 SERVLR 12
Author: V. Khalid
Bench: V. Khalid , R.S. Pathak
PETITIONER ... CITATION:
1987 AIR 1629 1987 SCR (2)1005
1987 SCC (3) 169 JT 1987 (3) 34
1987 SCALE (1)869
CITATOR INFO
State of Punjab v. Joginder Singh, [1963] Supp. 2 SCR
169, 191, 192; Roshan Lal Tandon v. Union of India ... letter
of appointment and agreement. [169 C-H]
State of Punjab v. Joginder Singh, [1963] Supp. 2 SCR
169, @ 191, 192, Kishori Mohanlal v. Union