Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 25 (0.22 seconds)Madhya Pradesh Industries Ltd vs Union Of India And Others on 16 August, 1965
25. The above observations leave no manner of doubt that it was in view of the amendment in Rule 55 of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 that the decision in Bhagat Raja v. The Union of India was different from Madhya Pradesh Industries Ltd. v. Union of India which had been rendered on the unamended Rule 55 of the said Rules.
Bhagat Raja vs The Union Of India & Ors on 29 March, 1967
25. The above observations leave no manner of doubt that it was in view of the amendment in Rule 55 of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 that the decision in Bhagat Raja v. The Union of India was different from Madhya Pradesh Industries Ltd. v. Union of India which had been rendered on the unamended Rule 55 of the said Rules.
Section 7 in The Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 [Entire Act]
Section 92 in The Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 [Entire Act]
Section 491 in The Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 [Entire Act]
Section 8 in The Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 [Entire Act]
Siemens Engineering & Manufacturing ... vs Union Of India & Anr on 30 April, 1976
; Bhagat Raja v. The Union of India ; Travancore Rayon Ltd.s v. Union of India AIR 1967 SC 862; Mahabir Prasad Santosh Kumar v. State of U.P. ; Rangnath v. Daulatrao : and The Siemens Engineering & Manufacturing Co. of India Ltd v. The Union of India on which Mr. Ramamurthi has heavily leaned has anything to do with disciplinary proceedings. As such, they have little bearing on the point with which we are at present concerned.
Travancore Rayon Ltd vs Union Of India on 28 October, 1969
24. We would also like to point out that the observations in Travancore Rayon Ltd. v. Union of India.