Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.23 seconds)
Shri Tirthankar Bhattacharjee vs Indian Oil Corporation Ltd on 11 April, 2017 cites

Bhagwan Dass & Anr vs Kamal Abrol & Ors on 11 May, 2005

It is an entirely another matter that the Teshildar, Kadamtala T.K., Dharmanagar subsequently issued W.A. NO.14/ 2015 Page 9 of 15 Standard Residency Certificate on 21-9-2013, i.e., long after the last date for submission of the application was over. By this time, several other documentary evidences also came into existence and were produced by the respondent No. 7 and other revenue authorities to show that the respondent No. 7 is a resident of Kadamtala village. That apart, the Certificate of Shifting (Annexure-P/11 annexed to the rejoinder-affidavit) dated 22-4-2014 issued by the Dharmanagar Municipal Council also shows that the respondent No. 7 was permitted to shift from Dharmanagar, Para of Tilthai Road to Kadamtala G/P Municipal Council under Kadamtala RD Block with the date of leaving as 23-4-14, which is demonstrative of the fact that he was never a resident of Kadamtala village prior to 23-4-2014. The question as to how the residency of an applicant for LPG dealership should be determined came up for consideration before the Apex Court in Bhagwan Dass v. Kamal Abrol, (2005) 11 SCC 66. In that case, one of the eligibility criteria for allotment of LPG Dealership was that a candidate should be a "resident" of the district concerned (Kangra). The Apex Court, after reviewing a plethora of cases, construed the term "residence" as follows:
Supreme Court of India Cites 9 - Cited by 41 - P P Naolekar - Full Document

Mrs. Rekha Chaturvedi vs University Of Rajasthan And Ors on 13 January, 1993

7. The question to be determined now is whether the required eligibility of the candidates should be examined with reference to the date of selection and not with reference to the last date for making applications. In our opinion, the policy of transparency, predictability and non-arbitrariness demands that the eligibility must be examined with reference to the last date of submission of the application and not otherwise. In other words, the candidate for RGGLV must show that he is eligible and satisfies the eligibility criteria for the selection on the last date of submission of the application. He must enclose along with the application all the supporting W.A. NO.14/ 2015 Page 12 of 15 documents prescribed in the advertisement on the last date of submission of the application. Thus, he must enclose the Standard Residency Certificate issued by the prescribed authority, and the Sale Deed showing that he has the land for construction of LPG Cylinder storage godown at Kadamtala and other supporting documents on the last date for submission of the application. Similar question once confronted the Apex Court, though in the context of recruitment to a post, in Rekha Chaturvedi v. University of Rajasthan, 1993 Supp(3) SCC 168. It was held as follows:
Supreme Court of India Cites 2 - Cited by 328 - P B Sawant - Full Document

A.P. Public Service Commission, ... vs B. Sarat Chandra & Ors on 10 April, 1990

The date of selection may be so fixed or manipulated as to entertain some applicants and reject others, arbitrarily. Hence, in the absence of a fixed date indicated in the advertisement/notification inviting applications with reference to which the requisite qualifications should be judged, the W.A. NO.14/ 2015 Page 13 of 15 only certain date for the scrutiny of the qualifications will be the last date for making the applications. We have, therefore, no hesitation in holding that when the Selection Committee in the present case, as argued by Shri Manoj Swarup, took into consideration the requisite qualifications as on the date of selection rather than on the last date of preferring applications, it acted with patent illegality, and on this ground itself the selections in question are liable to be quashed. Reference in this connection may also be made to two recent decisions of this Court in A.P. Public Service Commission, Hyderabad v. B. Sarat Chandra1 and District Collector & Chairman, Vizianagaram Social Welfare Residential School Society, Vizianagaram v. M. Tripura Sundari Devi2."
Supreme Court of India Cites 0 - Cited by 253 - K J Shetty - Full Document

District Collector And Chairman ... vs M. Tripura Sundari Devi on 20 April, 1990

The date of selection may be so fixed or manipulated as to entertain some applicants and reject others, arbitrarily. Hence, in the absence of a fixed date indicated in the advertisement/notification inviting applications with reference to which the requisite qualifications should be judged, the W.A. NO.14/ 2015 Page 13 of 15 only certain date for the scrutiny of the qualifications will be the last date for making the applications. We have, therefore, no hesitation in holding that when the Selection Committee in the present case, as argued by Shri Manoj Swarup, took into consideration the requisite qualifications as on the date of selection rather than on the last date of preferring applications, it acted with patent illegality, and on this ground itself the selections in question are liable to be quashed. Reference in this connection may also be made to two recent decisions of this Court in A.P. Public Service Commission, Hyderabad v. B. Sarat Chandra1 and District Collector & Chairman, Vizianagaram Social Welfare Residential School Society, Vizianagaram v. M. Tripura Sundari Devi2."
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 715 - P B Sawant - Full Document
1