Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.29 seconds)
Bandela Alphonsus vs Regional Director, Dav Public Schools on 27 January, 2017 cites

Bhairulal Chunilal vs State Of Bombay on 16 June, 1953

11. Both English Law and the American Law definitely state that in exercising the discretion, the court should consider all the 6 circumstances of the case, including lapse of time, and circumstances which would establish laches, acquiescence or estoppel, and whether the public interest will be served. Chief justice Chagla said in Bhairulal Chunilal v. State of Bombay 5 thus :-
Bombay High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 24 - B P Sinha - Full Document

The University Of Mysore And Anr vs C. D. Govinda Rao And Anr on 26 August, 1963

13. Way back in the year 1963, the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in the matter of The University of Mysore & another v. C. D. Govinda Rao & another 6 while dealing with the nature of writ of quo warranto has held in no uncertain terms that before a citizen can claim a writ of quo warranto, he must satisfy the Court that the office in question is a public office and is held by 5 AIR 1954 Bombay 116 6 AIR 1965 SC 491 : (1964) 4 SCR 575 7 usurper without legal authority by observing as under:-
Supreme Court of India Cites 2 - Cited by 754 - P B Gajendragadkar - Full Document

?:+N? J,??&?P?Q?6? ??Tu?????F?K ... vs (??X#Qn?� ?D ?D4? ??Oo ?#? ?`C?? ? ... on 31 August, 2010

Even otherwise, the post of Senior Primary Teacher (Biology) of DAV Public School is not an office in line with the decision as indicated by Sir William Wade in his Administrative Law and in G.D. Karkare (supra). Therefore, I have no hesitation to hold that this petition is not a bona fide writ petition seeking writ of quo warranto and as such discretionary relief of quo warranto cannot be granted at the instance of the petitioner. The writ petition deserves to be and is accordingly dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own cost(s).
Gujarat High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 188 - D H Waghela - Full Document
1