Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 13 (0.91 seconds)Article 14 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
State Of Bihar Etc. Etc vs Kripalu Shanker Etc. Etc on 28 April, 1987
This view was followed in State of Bihar v. Kripalu Shankar,3 where it was held that:
The Chief Of Marketing (Marketing ... vs Mewat Chemicals & Tiny S.S.I. Coal ... on 26 March, 2004
In Chief of Marketing (Marketing Division), Coal India Ltd. v. Mewat Chemicals and Tiny SSI Coal Pulverising Unit7, the Supreme Court, dealing with a submission of ''vested rights'' of an applicant for consideration of his case according to an old policy, held as follows:
Karam Pal & Ors. Etc vs Union Of India & Ors on 12 March, 1985
32. Admittedly, the petitioner has not challenged (and we suspect, cannot challenge) the cut off date prescribed in the 1995 notification. Likewise, he has not challenged the eviction order; and his status as an unauthorized occupant. As held by the Supreme Court in Karam Pal v. Union of India,8
''In the absence of challenge to the Rules and the Regulations, resultant situations flowing from compliance of the same are not open to attack''.
Netai Bag & Ors vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 27 September, 2000
In Netai Bag v. State of W.B.,9 the Supreme Court held as follows:
State Of Madhya Pradesh & Ors vs Nandlal Jaiswal & Ors on 24 October, 1986
In State of M.P. v. Nandlal Jaiswal it was held that the policy decision can be interfered with by the court only if such decision is shown to be patently arbitrary, discriminatory or mala fide''.
State Of Bihar & Ors vs Kameshwar Prasad Singh & Anr on 27 April, 2000
State Of Rajasthan & Ors vs D.R. Laxmi & Ors on 12 September, 1996
52. The issue as to whether a void order is a nullity from inception, or has legal effect until an appropriately constituted proceeding is initiated, and a declaration made, has been discussed in several judgments. It has been held that though an order may be void, the willingness of a court to grant relief, in legal proceedings where the status of the order is debated would depend on a host of factors, impinging upon the conduct of the petitioner. This precise issue was considered in the context of the time taken by a litigant in approaching the court for relief,against a void order, after considerable delay, by the Supreme Court in State of Rajasthan v. D.R. Laxmi11 where the Court held as follows: