Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 19 (0.29 seconds)The Representation Of The People Act, 1950
Section 27 in The Representation Of The People Act, 1950 [Entire Act]
The Coinage Act, 2011
Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing Act 1966
Shri Pratapgarh Seva Sahakari Mandali ... vs The Director, Agricultural Marketing ... on 21 August, 2020
In the case of Shri Pratapgarh Seva Sahakari
Mandali Limited Vs. Director, Agricultural Marketing
and Rural Finance (Supra), upon which, reliance has
been placed by the learned advocate for the petitioner,
this Court has observed that "Not only that after
ascertaining the facts from the contemporaneous record
produced by the petitioner Society, the Authorized
Officer has reached to a conclusion that there is some
interpolation in the agenda book as also the Resolution
book...". Thus, in the said case, necessary record was
produced before the authorised officer. In the present
case, no such evidence was produced by the petitioner
before respondent No.1. At this stage, it is also
required to be noted that in the said case, this Court
did not interfere with the election process and the
petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India challenging the order of authorised officer
excluding the names of the Members of the Managing
Committee of the concerned petitioner Society was not
entertained as there was alternative remedy available
to the concerned petitioner. Thus, this decision, upon
which, reliance is placed by the learned advocate for
the petitioner would not render any assistance to him.
Section 22 in The Coinage Act, 2011 [Entire Act]
Election Commission Of India Through ... vs Ashok Kumar & Ors on 30 August, 2000
19. The Honourable Supreme Court in the case of
Election Commission of India Vs. Ashok Kumar (supra),
upon which, reliance is placed by the learned advocate
for the petitioner, has observed in Paragraph-32 as
under: