Tamil Nadu Tourism Development vs M/S.Srm Hotels Private Limited on 20 June, 2024
(h) Punjab Communications Ltd. vs. Union of India and
others (1999) 4 SCC 727:-
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 358 (1.88 seconds)Documents citing
Punjab Communications Ltd vs Union Of India & Others on 4 May, 1999
M. Parvatham vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 10 July, 2024
In Punjab Communication Ltd v. Union
of India , this Court explained the difference between
procedural and substantive legitimate expectation in the
following terms:
M. Parvatham vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 10 July, 2024
In Punjab Communication Ltd v. Union
of India , this Court explained the difference between
procedural and substantive legitimate expectation in the
following terms:
Anusuchit Jati Jamati Shikshan Sanstha ... vs State Of Maharashtra Through Its Chief ... on 3 April, 2024
The relevant portion of the judgment in the
case of Punjab Communications Ltd. (supra) is extracted
below:
Gvk Industries Limited vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 2 December, 2003
In Punjab Communications Ltd. v. Union of India, , the Apex Court considered the relevant case law on doctrine of legitimate expectation.
Steel Plant Employees Union vs Steel Authority Of India Limited on 28 March, 2002
16. It is relevant to refer the observation of the Supreme Court in
Punjab Communications Ltd., v. Union of India, reported in AIR 1999
Supreme Court 1801: (para 40)
40The result is that change in policy can defeat a substantive
legitimate expectation if it can be justified on Wednesbury
reasonableness.
M/S. Fortune Five Hydel Projects Pvt. ... vs Karnataka Electricity Regulatory ... on 29 March, 2019
(c) Punjab Communications Limited v. Union of India reported as
(1999) 4 SCC 727 (Para 37, 38, 40, 42)
Nagarjuna Fertilizers & Chemicals ... vs Union Of India (Uoi) Represented By Its ... on 25 July, 2003
In Punjab Communications Ltd., v. Union of India, Punjab Communications Ltd. v. Union of India, the Supreme Court after surveying the cases, both English and Indian, observed:
Society Of Auditors And Etc. vs Comptroller And Auditor General Of ... on 1 October, 1999
(iii) Punjab Communication Ltd. case and(iv) . That apart, I am of the firm opinion that the mere inconvenience would not amount to a legal prejudice and such inconvenience cannot be a ground to allege violation of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India.
Mrs.Bezawada Supriya, vs The Govt on 3 March, 2022
Initially, he placed reliance on Punjab
Communications Limited vs. Union of India91 and Kerala
State Beverages (M&M) Corporation Limited vs. P.P.
Suresh92, where the Court held that, it has been held under
English law that the decision maker's freedom to change the
policy in public interest, cannot be fettered by the application of
the principle of substantive legitimate expectation. Observations
in earlier cases project a more inflexible rule than is in vogue
presently. In Re Findlay93 the House of Lords rejected the plea
that the altered policy relating to parole for certain categories of
prisoners required prior consultation with the prisoner. Lord
Scarman observed: