Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 74 (1.19 seconds)
Documents citing Sidhartha Sarawgi vs Board Of Trustees For Port Of ... on 16 April, 2014

Smt Geetha Hegde vs Union Of India on 6 August, 2024

NC: 2024:KHC:31277 WP No. 13921 of 2023 2003 suggest that the Central Government is indeed conferred with power to "direct" CEA to perform its function contemplated under Section 68 of the Act, 2003. As held by the Apex Court in the case of Siddharta Sarawgi supra administrative function need not be discharged by the primary delegate and such functions may be entrusted to the concerned/competent authority.
Karnataka High Court Cites 65 - Cited by 0 - S R Kumar - Full Document

Udupi Kasargode Transmission Limited vs Mr. Emmanuel Vincent D Sa on 27 July, 2023

the Act, 2003, a holistic reading of Section 73 of the Act, 2003 suggest that the Central Government is indeed conferred with power to "direct" CEA to perform its function contemplated under Section 68 of the Act, 2003. As held by the Apex Court in the case of Siddharta Sarawgi supra administrative function need not be discharged by the primary delegate and such functions may be entrusted to the concerned/competent authority.
Karnataka High Court Cites 39 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Date Of Decision: 13.11.2024 vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And Ors on 13 November, 2024

10. Careful perusal of aforesaid provision clearly reveals that leave sanctioning authority is also competent to hand over the additional charge during the leave period of the concerned officer to the other officer working under his control. Since in the case at hand, Deputy Commissioner, Kangra, was competent to sanction leave to Sub Divisional Officer (Civil), Baijnath, he was well within his rights to give charge of post of the Sub Divisional Officer to Tehsildar, who by virtue of passing order dated 15.6.2024 was thereafter exercising duties of Sub Divisional Officer (Civil), Baijnath, w.e.f. 24.6.2024 to 12.7.2024. Since elections to the post in question were held on 9.7.2024, while Tehsildar was possessing power of Sub Divisional Officer (Civil), no illegality can be said to have been committed by him while conducting elections, to the post of President and Vice President. At this stage, it would be apt to take note of judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Sidhartha Sarawgi v. Board of Trustees for the Port of Kokata and Ors. (2014) 16 SCC 248 (a/w connected matter), pressed into service by the learned counsel for the petitioner, wherein Hon'ble Apex Court while dealing with issue of 12 2024:HHC:11680 legislative function/power held that Legislature cannot delegate essential legislative functions which consist in the determination or choosing of the legislative policy and formally enacting that policy into a binding rule of conduct.
Himachal Pradesh High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - S Sharma - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next