Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 60 (1.39 seconds)
Documents citing Laxmi Shankar Pandey vs Union Of India And Ors on 19 March, 1991

Shankar vs . Uoi on 9 September, 2014

The reference petition stand answered. Both the sides will bear their own costs. Memo of costs be drawn. A copy of this Award be LAC No. 24/2011 Page 25 of 26 Shankar vs. UOI sent to Land Acquisition Collector, Delhi, for necessary information, action and immediate compliance on his part, after the period of first appeal is over.
Delhi District Court Cites 32 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

S.Selvam vs The Commandant on 24 August, 2011

36.As far as the present case is concerned, the Petitioner filed W.P.No.6409 of 1999 before this Court praying to quash the order of removal dated 19.05.1998 and the Learned Single Judge, by his order dated 19.11.2002, had quashed the order of removal. Subsequently, the Respondents filed Writ Appeal No.1698 of 2003 and by an order dated 16.07.2004, the Division Bench set aside the order of the Learned Single Judge in W.P.No.6409 of 1999 dated 19.11.2002 in interfering with the order of removal from service of the Petitioner and allowed the Writ Appeal. Although the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.1698 of 2003 had sustained the order of removal from service of the Petitioner, taking note of the fact that he was aged about 35 years and he had to maintain his family, following the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Laxmi Shankar Pandey V. Union of India and others [(1991) 2 Supreme Court Cases 488 : AIR 1991 SC 1070], it directed the Petitioner to make a representation to the 4th Respondent viz., The Director General of Police for re-employment and if any representation was made, the 4th Respondent was directed to consider his application for re-appointment to any suitable post as a fresh appointee.
Madras High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 1 - M Venugopal - Full Document

State Of Uttarakhand vs Ajam on 12 June, 2017

54. Their Lordships of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in (2016) 3 SCC 669, in the case of Laxmi vs. Union of India and others and other analogous matters have issued directions to regulate sale of acid and other corrosive substances. Their Lordships have also highlighted setting up of a Criminal Injuries Compensation Board for acid attack victims and generally. Their lordships have held as under:-
Uttarakhand High Court Cites 84 - Cited by 0 - R Sharma - Full Document

Mohd. Kaleem vs State Of U.P. on 24 November, 2015

56.With the advent of Victim Compensation Scheme, 2014, DLSA/SLSA will be flooded with claims for compensation. All the DLSAs do not have full time Secretaries. To fully effectuate the Scheme and keeping in view the time limit prescribed by the Scheme itself and Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Laxmi Devi(supra) need to have full time Secretary in DLSAs has become imminent. Civil Judge (Senior Division) who works as Secretary DLSA is already preoccupied with judicial work, being holder of parent court, Member Secretary, SLSA will take up the matter with the State Govt. for creation of posts of full time Secretaries in all the DLSAs of State. State Government would do well to act with all promptness for ensuring success of its Scheme.
Allahabad High Court Cites 35 - Cited by 0 - S K Saxena - Full Document

Sonali Mukherjee @ Sonali Mukharjee vs The Union Of India & Ors on 28 September, 2019

According to learned counsel for the petitioner in the notification issued on 23rd September, 2019 although reference to provide treatment by the hospitals have been made but merely by making reference without bringing on record the decision taken by due deliberations with the management of the private hospitals, the same cannot be said to be sufficient compliance of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Laxmi Vs. Union of India & Ors (W.P. (Crl) No. 129 of 2006).
Jharkhand High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - S N Prasad - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 Next