Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 48 (0.48 seconds)Article 16 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Himachal Pradesh Societies Registration Act, 2006
Vikas Gupta vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And Others And ... on 17 December, 2021
In CWP No. 3743 of 2021, titled as Vikas Gupta and
Others v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Others., decided on
11.9.2022 (alongwith connected matters), which has been further
upheld upto the Hon'ble Apex Court, coordinate Bench of this Court
has held as under:
Article 21 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Dharam Singh And Others vs The State Of Uttar Pradesh on 9 March, 1962
In this context, the mere fact that the State had taken a
decision to outsource the infrastructure and manpower could
have relevance, as a temporary measure only to negotiate the
immediate requirements, but cannot be justified as a
permanent feature in the teeth of what has been held in
Dharam Singh and Jaggo (supra).
M/S. Fuerst Day Lawson Ltd vs Jindal Exports Ltd on 4 May, 2001
In Fuerst Day Lawson Ltd. v. Jindal Exports Ltd. (2001
6 SCC 356), the Court discussed when a judgment can be held per
incuriam:
Md. Abdul Kadir & Anr vs Director General Of Police, Assam & Ors on 22 April, 2009
Ashwani Kumar and Anr. (1996) 1 SCC 773 and Mohd. Abdul Kadir
and Anr. v. Director-General of Police, Assam and Ors (2009) 6
SCC 611, to state that no vested right is created in favour of the
workman in temporary employment.
State Of U.P. And Ors vs Renusagar Power Co. And Others on 28 July, 1988
27.The corporate veil indisputably can be pierced when the
corporate personality is found to be opposed to justice,
convenience and interest of the revenue or workman or against
public interest. See C.I.T. Madras v The Meenakshi Mills Ltd
and Ors., [1967] 1 SCR 934; Workmen Employed in Assn.
Rubber Industry Ltd., Bhavnagar v. Associated Rubber Industry
Ltd., Bhavnagar and Anr. [1985] 4 SCC 11; New Horizons Ltd.
and Anr. v Union of India and Ors., [1995] 1 SCC 478; State of
U.P. and Ors. v. Renusagar Power Co. and Ors. , [1988] 4 SCC
59; Hussainbhai, Calicut v. The Hath Factory Thezhilali Union,
Kozhikode and Ors., [1978] 4 SCC 257 and Secretary H.S.E.B.
v. Suresh and Ors., [1999] 3 SCC 601."
State Of Himachal Pradesh & Others vs Sh. Sant Ram & Another on 7 October, 2023
judgment dated 07.10.2023, passed in LPA No.153 of 2023,
titled State of H.P. and Others Vs. Sant Ram and Another,
laying therein challenge to judgment dated 06.09.2022 passed
by learned Single Judge in CWPOA No.3562 of 2019, stands
dismissed vide judgment dated 06.02.2025, if it is so, case of
the petitioner, being similarly situate to that of Sant Ram's case
(supra), is also required to be allowed in terms of judgment
rendered by Coordinate Bench of this Court in afore case,
especially when respondents have themselves admitted that
petitioner's case is similarly situate to Sant Ram (supra), and as
such, respondents can be directed to decide the case of the
petitioner in light of the aforesaid judgment rendered by this
Court.