cites: 19904386

1 - 2 of 2 (0.17 seconds)

Anil Kumar vs The Superintendent Of Post Offices on 4 October, 2011 cites

Union Of India & Ors vs Rajesh P.U., Puthuvalnikathu & Anr on 30 July, 2003

Counsel for the applicant referred to a decision of the Apex Court in the case of Union of India and Others vs Rajesh U.P. Puthuvalnikathu and Another (2003) 7 SCC 285 to hammer home his point that cancellation is illegal. The said decision read inter alia as under:-

Supreme Court of India Cites 0 - Cited by 268 - Full Document

The Excise ... vs K.B.N. Visweshwara Rao & Ors on 22 August, 1996

8. Cancellation in this case was on account of the fact that there were only four applications two of which are from the sons of the very Branch Post Master. It is to be noted here that one of the requirements is that the selected candidate should reside in the delivery jurisdiction of the Chembanaruvi post office. Renotification brought a larger number of applications. It has been held in the case of Excise Supdt. Vs K.B.N. Visweshwara Rao (1996) 6 SCC 216 as under:-

Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 264 - K Ramaswamy - Full Document

Get alerts for new judgments matching this query.

Search Results Page

Refine Search

Search Results

Union Of India & Ors vs Rajesh P.U., Puthuvalnikathu & Anr on 30 July, 2003

The Excise ... vs K.B.N. Visweshwara Rao & Ors on 22 August, 1996