Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 15 (0.30 seconds)M/S Ashoka Smokeless Coal Ind. P. Ltd. & ... vs Union Of India & Ors on 1 December, 2006
5. Subsequently, a claim for refund of the excess money was rejected
by the Patna High Court, hence, the matter again reached to the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of S.J. Coke Industries Private Limited
(Supra) wherein, it was held that the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the case of Eastern Coalfields Limited (Supra) was binding
under Article 141 of the Constitution and that the benefit of the decision
rendered in the case of Ashoka Smokeless Coal India (P) Ltd. (Supra)
was not confined to those who were parties to those cases but it would be
granted to all regardless of the fact that whether they were party to the case
or not.
Article 14 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Virender Chaudhary vs Bharat Petroleum Corp. & Ors on 7 November, 2008
In the peculiar circumstances of the case, the plea raised by the
counsel for the appellant to reject the writ petition on the ground of delay
and latches cannot be accepted, hence, the appellant is not entitled to the
benefit of the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of
Virender Chaudhary vs. Bharat Petroleum Corporation and Others
reported in (2009) 1 SCC 297, S.S. Balu and Another vs. State of Kerala
and Others reported in (2009) 2 SCC 479, New Delhi Municipal
10 APOT 36 of 2021
Council vs Pan Singh and Others reported in (2007) 9 SCC 278, U.P. Jal
Nigam and Another vs. Jaswant Singh and Another reported in (2006)
11 SCC 464 and Eastern Coalfields Limited vs. Dugal Kumar reported
in (2008) 14 SCC 295.
New Delhi Municipal Council vs Pan Singh & Ors on 8 March, 2007
In the peculiar circumstances of the case, the plea raised by the
counsel for the appellant to reject the writ petition on the ground of delay
and latches cannot be accepted, hence, the appellant is not entitled to the
benefit of the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of
Virender Chaudhary vs. Bharat Petroleum Corporation and Others
reported in (2009) 1 SCC 297, S.S. Balu and Another vs. State of Kerala
and Others reported in (2009) 2 SCC 479, New Delhi Municipal
10 APOT 36 of 2021
Council vs Pan Singh and Others reported in (2007) 9 SCC 278, U.P. Jal
Nigam and Another vs. Jaswant Singh and Another reported in (2006)
11 SCC 464 and Eastern Coalfields Limited vs. Dugal Kumar reported
in (2008) 14 SCC 295.
Chairman, U.P.Jal Nigam & Anr vs Jaswant Singh & Anr on 10 November, 2006
In the peculiar circumstances of the case, the plea raised by the
counsel for the appellant to reject the writ petition on the ground of delay
and latches cannot be accepted, hence, the appellant is not entitled to the
benefit of the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of
Virender Chaudhary vs. Bharat Petroleum Corporation and Others
reported in (2009) 1 SCC 297, S.S. Balu and Another vs. State of Kerala
and Others reported in (2009) 2 SCC 479, New Delhi Municipal
10 APOT 36 of 2021
Council vs Pan Singh and Others reported in (2007) 9 SCC 278, U.P. Jal
Nigam and Another vs. Jaswant Singh and Another reported in (2006)
11 SCC 464 and Eastern Coalfields Limited vs. Dugal Kumar reported
in (2008) 14 SCC 295.
Eastern Coalfields Ltd vs Dugal Kumar on 28 July, 2008
In the peculiar circumstances of the case, the plea raised by the
counsel for the appellant to reject the writ petition on the ground of delay
and latches cannot be accepted, hence, the appellant is not entitled to the
benefit of the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of
Virender Chaudhary vs. Bharat Petroleum Corporation and Others
reported in (2009) 1 SCC 297, S.S. Balu and Another vs. State of Kerala
and Others reported in (2009) 2 SCC 479, New Delhi Municipal
10 APOT 36 of 2021
Council vs Pan Singh and Others reported in (2007) 9 SCC 278, U.P. Jal
Nigam and Another vs. Jaswant Singh and Another reported in (2006)
11 SCC 464 and Eastern Coalfields Limited vs. Dugal Kumar reported
in (2008) 14 SCC 295.
M/S Surya Constuctions Through Its ... vs The State Of Uttar Pradesh Urban ... on 8 March, 2019
10. It is worth noting that reliance has been placed by learned Counsel
for the respondent upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the
matter of Surya Constructions vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others
reported in (2019) 16 SCC 794 wherein it has been held that for refund of
undisputed amount, the writ petition is maintainable.
State Of U.P.& Ors vs Arvind Kumar Srivastava & Ors on 17 October, 2014
In the matter of
State of Uttar Pradesh and Others vs. Arvind Kumar Srivastava and
Others reported in (2015) 1 SCC 347, it is held that when a particular
employee is given relief by the Court, all other identically situated persons
should be treated alike by extending the same benefit since not doing so
would amount to discrimination and be violative of Article 14 of the
Constitution and that the exception of delay would not apply to those
cases where judgment pronounced by the Court was judgment in rem with
intention to benefit all similarly situated persons irrespective of whether
they had approached the Court or not.
Bhag Singh & Ors vs Union Territory Of Chandigarh, Through ... on 14 August, 1985
Reliance is also placed by Counsel for the
respondents (writ petitioners) upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the matter of Bhag Singh and Others vs. UT of Chandigarh
reported in (1985) 3 SCC 737 wherein in a matter relating to right to claim
higher compensation, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the legitimate
11 APOT 36 of 2021
and just claim of a citizen should not be defeated on technical plea.