Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 17 (3.59 seconds)
Saurabh Mantri vs Union Of India (2023:Rj-Jd:43873) on 14 December, 2023 cites

Maneka Gandhi vs Union Of India on 25 January, 1978

In Maneka Gandhi (supra), the Apex Court held that fair opportunity of being heard must be (Downloaded on 18/12/2023 at 08:47:32 PM) [2023:RJ-JD:43873] (6 of 9) [CW-7880/2023] given following immediately the order impounding passport in order to satisfy the mandate of natural justice. Importantly, no post decisional hearing is also provided to the petitioner in the instant case.
Supreme Court of India Cites 134 - Cited by 1982 - M H Beg - Full Document

Amrit Bhushan Gupta vs Union Of India And Ors on 29 November, 1976

In support of aforesaid points, Shri Maheshwari placed reliance on Maneka Gandhi v/s Union of India reported in (1978) 1 SCC 248, Rajesh Sharma & Others v/s State of U.P. & Others reported in (2018) 10 SCC 472, Navin Kumar Sonkar v/s Union of India & Others reported in ILR 2018 MP 677, Mohd. Farid v/s Union of India & Others (Writ No.59959/2016), Sanjay Gupta v/s Union of India & Others (W.P. No.2390/2015), Neera Chandra v/s Union of India (W.P. No.27307/2019), Daler v/s Union of India & Others (W.P. No.12143/2015), Suresh Nanda v/s CBI reported in (2008) 3 SCC 674, Manish Kumar Mittal v/s Chief Passport Officer & Another reported in 2013 SCC OnLine Del.
Supreme Court of India Cites 9 - Cited by 17 - M H Beg - Full Document

Suresh Nanda vs C.B.I on 24 January, 2008

In support of aforesaid points, Shri Maheshwari placed reliance on Maneka Gandhi v/s Union of India reported in (1978) 1 SCC 248, Rajesh Sharma & Others v/s State of U.P. & Others reported in (2018) 10 SCC 472, Navin Kumar Sonkar v/s Union of India & Others reported in ILR 2018 MP 677, Mohd. Farid v/s Union of India & Others (Writ No.59959/2016), Sanjay Gupta v/s Union of India & Others (W.P. No.2390/2015), Neera Chandra v/s Union of India (W.P. No.27307/2019), Daler v/s Union of India & Others (W.P. No.12143/2015), Suresh Nanda v/s CBI reported in (2008) 3 SCC 674, Manish Kumar Mittal v/s Chief Passport Officer & Another reported in 2013 SCC OnLine Del.
Supreme Court of India Cites 17 - Cited by 258 - Full Document

Smt. Naseem Bano vs State Of U.P. And Others on 13 August, 1993

In Naseem Bano v/s The State of U.P. & Others reported in 1993 Supp. (4) SCC 46, the Apex Court held that if specific pleadings of petition are not denied by the respondents while filing reply, the averments can be treated to be admitted. Thus, I find substantial force in the argument of Shri Maheshwari that the passport was impounded on 09.09.2019 before furnishing the documents and without affording any opportunity of hearing.
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 861 - S C Agrawal - Full Document

Narendra K. Ambwani vs Union Of India on 13 March, 2014

6. There are at least two separate judgments and orders of our court, making it clear that under the Rules framed under the Act, particularly Rule 12, a passport other than for a child aged less than 15 years should be issued for a minimum period of 10 years. The first of these two judgments was delivered in Writ Petition No.361 of 2014 in the case of Narendra K. Ambwani vs. Union of India on 13 March 2014. By this judgment, our court issued directions inter alia requiring the Passport Office in all cases where the Magistrate's court directs renewal of passport under the Rules, the Passports Rules, 1980 would apply and passports other than for a child aged less than 15 years would have to be renewed for a period of at least 10 years. If, on the other hand, the Magistrate were to pass an order making a reference to the Notification of 25 August 1993 (G.S.R. 570(E)), the passport would be renewed only for such period as the Magistrate may specify in his order or otherwise as specified in the notification, namely, one year.
Bombay High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 17 - A K Menon - Full Document
1   2 Next