Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 31 (0.84 seconds)
Documents citing Gulabrao Keshavrao Patil & Ors vs State Of Gujarat & Ors on 1 December, 1995

Chhotkan Prasad And Ors. vs Chief Secretary, Panchayati Raj And ... on 15 November, 2002

The aforesaid decision came up for consideration before the Apex Court in State Government Houseless Harijan Employees Association (supra), wherein the Apex Court reaffirming its view in Gulabrao (supra), held that there was a conflict between the Revenue Department and Urban Development and Urban Housing Department whether proceedings under Section 4(1) of the Act were to be dropped or not. The matter was to be submitted to the Chief Minister for placing before the Cabinet. However, before the decision could be taken by the Cabinet, the owners wanted to enforce the decision taken by the Revenue Minister.
Allahabad High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - R K Agrawal - Full Document

Bishambhar Prasad vs M/S Arfat Petrochemicals Private ... on 20 April, 2023

85. We are, however, unable to agree with the contentions placed by Respondent No. 1. It appears to us that the Rules of Business have been substantially complied with. The entire Cabinet was called on 29.12.2018 to consider various decisions taken by RIICO during the previous regime. Among these were the supplementary leases and connected permissions to Respondent No. 1 by RIICO. The Cabinet, which included the Minister for Industries, then proceeded to constitute three sub- committees to investigate these alleged irregularities, along with an inter-departmental committee. The Minister for Industries is not expected to look into each individual matter pertaining to RIICO as this would render the entire working of government unviable. The intention behind Article 166(3) under which the Rules of Business are framed, have been succinctly set out by this Court in Gulabrao Keshavrao Patil & Ors. v. State of Gujarat24:
Supreme Court of India Cites 38 - Cited by 3 - S Kant - Full Document

Kachchh Jal Sankat Nivaran Samiti vs State Of Gujarat And 8 Ors. on 4 October, 2005

In support of this, our attention was invited to a decision rendered by the Apex Court in the case of Gulabrao v. State of Gujarat, wherein the Apex Court observed that the cabinet is driving and steering body responsible for governance and its primary function is to formulate policies in conformity with the directive principles of the Constitution and carry on the executive function of the State as per the Constitution and the laws.
Gujarat High Court Cites 23 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Krishi Utpanna Bazar Samiti, ... vs State Of Maharashtra And Ors. on 9 August, 2001

The petitioner has placed reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of "Gulabrao Patil" (supra) wherein the Supreme Court held that the order of the State Government must be express in the name of the Governor and then communicated to the person concerned and the decision of a Minister under Business Rules shall not be final or conclusive. The Apex Court had examined the provisions of Rule 12 and 15 of the Business Rules framed by the State Government under Article 166(3) of the Constitution and in para 14 it observed, thus :--
Bombay High Court Cites 36 - Cited by 2 - B H Marlapalle - Full Document

Mohansingh Tanwani And Anr. vs State Of Maharashtra And Ors. on 22 March, 2001

(supra) and "Gulabrao Patil" (supra) are squarely applicable to this case and it has to be, in clear and unambiguous terms, stated that the order of dissolution communicated to the petitioner President or to the Municipal Council as passed under Section 313 of the Municipalities Act was not an order in the eyes of law and the said order was non est. On this ground alone, the impugned order deserves to be quashed and set aside,
Bombay High Court Cites 35 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 Next