Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 17 (0.49 seconds)
Now Residing At vs Union Of India Through Secretary on 15 January, 2014 cites

Sardar Harcharan Singh Brar vs Sukh Darshan Singh & Ors on 27 October, 2004

In the case of Sardar Harcharan Singh Brar v. Sukh Darshan Singh (supra) the appellants had challenged the dismissal of election petition at the threshold without having heard and decided on merit on the ground that it had failed to comply with the provisions of Sections 81, 82 or 117, which provide for presentation of petition, parties to the petition and security for cost.
Supreme Court of India Cites 20 - Cited by 61 - R C Lahoti - Full Document

Medha Kotwal Lele & Ors vs U.O.I. & Ors on 19 October, 2012

44.4. The State functionaries and private and public sector undertakings/ organisations/ bodies/institutions etc. shall put in place sufficient mechanism to ensure full implementation of the Vishaka guidelines and further provide that if the alleged harasser is found guilty, the complainant - victim is not forced to work with/under such harasser and where appropriate and possible the alleged harasser should be transferred. Further provision should be made that harassment and intimidation of witnesses and the complainants shall be met with severe disciplinary action. As per the directives of the Honble Supreme Court in the matters of Vishaka and others Versus State of Rajasthan and Others (supra) and Medha Kotwal Lele and Others versus Union of India & Others (supra), the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 [hereinafter referred to as Sexual Harassment Act, 2013] has been passed with the objectives as laid down in the preamble to the Act, which reads as under:-
Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 80 - R M Lodha - Full Document
1   2 Next