Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 11 (0.36 seconds)Uma Kant Singh And Ors. With Sanjay Kumar ... vs State Of Bihar And Ors. on 18 July, 2001
Further,
the judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this
Court in the case of Dr. Amaresh Thakur (supra) and
Binod Kumar (supra) even though does not refer the
earlier judgments of the learned co-ordinate Bench,
they have been rendered in respect of the petitioner(s)
who had acquired higher qualification. These two
judgments are, therefore, not in conflict with the
earlier judgments on the subject. Accordingly, the
reference was answered by Full Bench of Patna High
Court.
P. Mahendran vs State Of Karnataka on 5 December, 1989
provision if expressly provided in the statute but the
principle is not applicable so far executive instruction is
concerned, as has been held by Hon'ble Apex Court in
the case of P. Mahendran and Ors. vs. State of
Karnataka and Ors., (1990) 1 SCC 411, wherein at
paragraph-5 it has been held which reads as hereunder:
Pradip J. Mehta vs Commissioner Of Income Tax,Ahmedabad on 11 April, 2008
20. This Court, in view of discussions made
hereinabove, and case laws laid down in the case of
Pradip J. Mehta (supra) is of the view that judgment
passed in the case of Ramashankar Patel (supra) since
is on the similar fact of the case, and further since the
same has been affirmed up-to Hon'ble Apex Court, is of
the view that the same will have persuasive value, since
the factual aspect of the given cases are similar, same
and except the date of order issued by the State of Bihar
Kusumam Hotels (P) Ltd vs Kerala State Electricity Board & Ors on 16 May, 2008
"A substantive law is held to be prospective as a
matter of legal policy since it is founded on public
policy that no right be so created as to work to the
disadvantage for whom it is created as it if be so, "it
would be betrayal of what the law stands for. "" (paras
91 to 93) 11. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Kusumam
Hotels Private Limited vs. Kerala State Electricity
Board & Ors., (2008) 13 SCC 213 has held that the
State is entitled to change its policy decision, however,
Reeta Srivastava & Ors vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 9 July, 2013
29. Counter affidavit was filed by the respondents-State
wherein relying upon the judgment passed in Reeta
Srivastava vs. State of Bihar &Ors with analogous
cases [(2012) (3) PLJR 353] by Patna High Court, that
qualification of Sahityalankar degree issued by Hindi
Vidyapith, Deoghar is not equivalent to graduation.
K.S. Paripoornan vs State Of Kerala on 12 September, 1994
In another judgment rendered by Hon'ble Apex
Court in K. S. Paripoornan vs. State of Kerala and
Ors., (1994) 5 SCC 593, it has been held which reads as
hereunder:
Chandra Bhushan Pd. Singh vs The State Of Bihar & Ors. on 3 July, 2013
Learned counsel also referred to a coordinate Bench
judgment dated 03.05.2016 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 4401
of 2013 (Chandra Bhushan Pd. Singh &Ors. Vs. The
State of Bihar &Ors.) for the same proposition.
Murlidhar Singh & Ors vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 14 July, 2009
(IX).The Full Bench of Patna High Court, in view of the
aforesaid discussions, has come to final conclusion
that there is no conflict of opinion in the two sets of
cases which have been referred by the learned Single
Judge in the case of Mamta Kumari (supra), Poonam
Sharma (supra) and Murlidhar Singh (supra) were
rendered in a totally different fact situation.
Poonam Sharma .And Ors vs State Of Bihar And Ors. on 6 July, 2017
(IX).The Full Bench of Patna High Court, in view of the
aforesaid discussions, has come to final conclusion
that there is no conflict of opinion in the two sets of
cases which have been referred by the learned Single
Judge in the case of Mamta Kumari (supra), Poonam
Sharma (supra) and Murlidhar Singh (supra) were
rendered in a totally different fact situation.