Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.49 seconds)
Documents citing Rameshwar Dayal vs Sub-Divisional Officer Ghatampur And ... on 22 May, 1961

The Managing Committee, Adars Unchh ... vs The President, Board Of Secondary ... on 22 February, 1973

Somewhat similar point was raised in the case of Rameshwar Dayal v. Sub-Divisional Officer, Ghetampur, (AIR 1963 All 518). In this case a direction had been given to stay the transfer of the charge of the office of Pradhan, under the U. P. Panchayat Raj Act, to the person declared elected Pradhan and further staying the removal of the existing Pradhan, during the pendency of the election petition. The point raised was Whether the authority passing the order had got all the powers conferred upon Courts under Sections 94 and 151 and Order 39. Rule 4 and Order 41, Rule 5 of the Civil Procedure Code.
Patna High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Bisheshwar Singh vs The Subdivisional Magistrate And Ors. on 26 February, 1973

9. There is one case relating to the U. P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947, which has come to my notice. It is the case of Rameshwar Dayal v. Sub-divisional Officer, Ghatampur, AIR 1963 All 518. In this case a direction had been given by the Sub-divisional Officer to stay transfer of the charge of the office of Pradhan to the person who was declared elected as the Pradhan and directing the stay of the removal of the petitioner from the office of the Pradhan during the pendency of an election petition filed by him against the election of the opposite party. The argument raised was that the Sub-divisional Officer had got all the powers conferred upon Courts by Sections 94 and 151 and Order 39, Rule 2 and Order 41, Rule 5 of the Code. Discussing the point in respect of the application of Section 151 of the Code the learned Chief Justice who delivered the judgment for the Court said:
Patna High Court Cites 26 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1