Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (1.61 seconds)
Documents citing Sasidharan vs Reserve Bank Of India on 23 June, 1990

Lakshmi Devi P.N vs The Commissioner on 19 December, 2013

of its recognized school and that the school is bound by the mandate of the CBSE Regulations and Rules, that the school shall be governed by the corresponding State rules regulating educational institutions. Accordingly it is contended that the school is regulated by the provisions of the Kerala Education Rules (KER), from the inception of its affiliation to the CBSE. On this basis also, it is contended that on the basis of Rule 37 of Chapter XIV-A KER, the 4th respondent had a superior claim in the matter of seniority and promotion at the time of occurrence of the vacancy of H.S.A. (Hindi) on 24.10.1997. We are of the view that it is not necessary to adjudicate on these rival pleas of the appellant and the 4th respondent on these issues, in view of our considered opinion that the promotion granted to the 4th respondent on 25.11.1997 could not have been lawfully disturbed by the issuance of Ext.P-8 order dated 5.6.2006, which is nine long years after the said promotion. This Court in Ext.P-11 judgment has held that the above said order of reversion inflicted on the 4th respondent after nine long years is arbitrary. Though it is observed in Ext.P-11 judgment that Writ Petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution is not maintainable, the said judgment as per Ext.P-11 does not in any way preclude the W.A.244/14 - : 25 :-
Kerala High Court Cites 21 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

V.A. Sakeena vs State Of Kerala

"18. xxxxxxxxxx. Such a reserve power to correct mistakes committed by itself has to be located in every public authority in the interests of justice and to avoid arbitrariness. It is not uncommon - in fact it is a human failing that errors are committed in the conduct of human affairs. Infallibility is not a human virtue, that being a quality attributable only to the Almighty. Such a power to correct apparent mistakes is therefore an absolute necessity and has to be found in every authority, even without a specific provision as was held by me earlier in my decision in Sasidharan v. Reserve Bank of India (1990 (2) KLT 573, paragraph, 7 relying on the decision in Karunakaran Nambiar V. Director of Public Instruction, 1966 KLT 290 and others".
Kerala High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - P N Ravindran - Full Document

T. Achuthan vs State Of Kerala Rep. By Secretary To on 30 May, 2008

17. No doubt the power of review can be exercised only when it is conferred and not by implication. But this principle is essentially applicable in the case of exercise of statutory power. The order passed by the Government Ext.P3 was not in exercise of any statutory power as such. It was a decision taken by the Government as part of its general executive power. Every administrative authority conferred with the power to take a decision in any particular matter will also have the power of rectification of any mistake which it has committed. The decision of this court in Sasidharan vs. Reserve Bank of India (1990(2) KLT 573) supports this proposition. In fact WPC.735 /2004 & conn.cases.
Kerala High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - V Giri - Full Document
1