Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 13 (0.65 seconds)
Documents citing Charan Dass Shorewala vs State Of Haryana on 16 January, 2001

Daya Shankar Sharma vs Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam ... on 12 December, 2011

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents does not dispute that the matter is squarely covered by the judgment rendered by this Court in CWP No.5956 of 2008 decided on CWP No.19205 of 2011 -2- 18.11.2008 titled as Charan Dass v. State of Haryana (P-3) In view of the above, the present petition is allowed in the same terms as passed in CWP No.5956 of 2008 decided on 18.11.2008 titled as Charan Dass v. State of Haryana (P-3).
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Joginder Singh vs The Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam ... on 12 December, 2011

Written statement has been filed on behalf of the respondents. The same is taken on record. It is not disputed that the matter is squarely covered by the judgment rendered by this CWP No.17622 of 2011 -2- Court in CWP No.5956 of 2008 decided on 18.11.2008 titled as Charan Dass v. State of Haryana (P-3) In view of the above, the present petition is allowed in the same terms as passed in CWP No.5956 of 2008 decided on 18.11.2008 titled as Charan Dass v. State of Haryana (P-3).
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Ch. Jagjit Singh And Ors. vs State Of Punjab And Ors. on 15 May, 2007

learned Counsel has referred to the investigation conducted so far whereby the statement of Manmohan Singh S.E. has been recorded on 22-4-2007. One Rameshwar Dutt Awasthi, who was working as Sub-Divisional Officer, at the Trust, is also a witness to payment of Rs. one crore and his statements under Section 161, Cr. P.C. and subsequently under Section 164, Cr. P.C. is also recorded. State counsel, however, was fair to say that there is no statement of Manmohan Singh, S.E. as such, but this is a result of investigation and is noticed in the Zimni recorded by the Investigating Officer. He has placed strong reliance on State Rep. By the C.B.I. v. Anil Sharma AIR 1977 SC 3806, Er. K.K. Jerath v. Union Territory, Chandigarh 1998 (2) RCR (Criminal) 418 : 1998 Cri LJ 2555, Directorate of Enforcement v. Ashok Kumar Jain 1998 Cri LJ 861, Dhani Ram Chaudhary v. State of Haryana 2000 (2) RCR 270 (Criminal and Charan Dass Shorewala v. State of Haryana 2001 (2) RCR (Criminal) 188, Referring to the observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Anil Sharma's case (supra), it is urged that custodial interrogation is qualitatively more elicitation orientated than questioning a suspect who is well ensconced with a favourable order under Section 438 of the Code.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - R Singh - Full Document

Rishal Singh vs The Chief Engineer on 24 August, 2011

A similar claim was considered CWP No. 15491 of 2011 -2- by a Division Bench of this Court in CWP No. 5956 of 2008 titled 'Charan Dass vs. State of Haryana' decided on 18.11.2008 wherein it was held that the employee belonging to the general category would be entitled to stepping up of his pay scale on the date of his promotion to the next higher post at par with his junior, who had been promoted earlier when benefit of roster point was granted to him. He contends that the petitioner had made a detailed representation dated 12.5.2011 (Annexure P/2) to the respondents which is pending consideration with the Chief Engineer, Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam, Panchkula-respondent No.1. He contends that the petitioner at this stage would be satisfied if a direction is issued to the Chief Engineer, Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam, Panchkula-respondent No.1 to consider and decide the claim of the petitioner as made by him through his representation dated 12.5.2011 (Annexure P/2) within some specified time.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - A G Masih - Full Document

Bhola Ram And Another vs Unknown on 11 September, 2008

Heard learned counsel for the parties. Keeping in view the aforesaid undisputed facts regarding determination of compensation by this Court in Charan Dass's case (supra) with regard to the acquisition of land vide notification dated 2.5.1979 in the same village for the same purpose where the value of the land was determined at Rs. 32,000/- per acre and the acquisition in the present case being one year and five months thereafter, in my considered opinion, an increase of 12% over and above the compensation determined in Charan Dass's case (supra) would be reasonable.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - R Bindal - Full Document
1   2 Next