Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 792 (0.87 seconds)
Documents citing Kuldeep Singh vs State Of Haryana on 8 February, 1996

News Item Published In The Indian ... vs State Of Haryana & Ors on 26 August, 2022

8. It is intimated that the monitoring committee constituted by the NGT in the O.A. No. 169/2020 Kuldeep Singh vs State of Haryana, the irrigation department is submitted a report to the monitoring committee that the dadam distributory from channel RD 20500 to 23500 is damaged due to illegal mining as well as filling the channel by the overburden and used as a pathway by the Project Proponent.
National Green Tribunal Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - A K Goel - Full Document

State vs 1. Mahadev Rawat on 24 April, 2018

In case reported as Kuldeep Singh Vs. State of Haryana, 1996 (1) Crimes 89 (SC), Hon'ble Apex Court observed that the accused person attacked the deceased with gandasa and lathies etc. Two of the accused were armed with a gun each, while five other accused persons were found armed with a pistol each which were not used. It was held that the common object of the unlawful assembly was not to commit the murder of the deceased.
Delhi District Court Cites 47 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

(O&M;) State Of Haryana And Ors vs Bharat Singh on 3 May, 2019

12. As regards the contention of the learned counsel for the 7 of 10 ::: Downloaded on - 13-07-2019 23:12:11 ::: RSA-2866-2001 8 respondent with regard to the absence from duty being not a grave misconduct which cannot be said to be a gravest act of misconduct, the said aspect has been dealt with by this Court in its judgment passed in CWP No. 3682 of 2012 titled as Kuldeep Singh vs. State of Haryana and others, decided on 28.02.2012, where a Constable has absented himself for a period of 55 days, 7 hours and 15 minutes and after holding a departmental enquiry, a show cause notice was issued and after taking into consideration the reply thereto, the punishing authority had dismissed him from service. A plea was, therefore, raised that an act of absence from duty had not been declared as a gravest act of misconduct and, therefore, on the basis of the said misconduct, order of dismissal could not have been passed. This Court while dealing with Rule 16.2 of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934, held as follows:-
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - A G Masih - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next