Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.39 seconds)Advocate General, State Of Bihar vs Madhya Pradesh Khair Industries Ltd on 5 March, 1980
3. The Commission in its aforesaid decision placed reliance on the
following Apex Court decision regarding vexatious and frivolous
petitions. The Supreme Court in Advocate General, Bihar vs.
M.P. Khair Industries(AIR 1980 SC 946) has termed "....filing of
frivolous and vexatious petitions as abuse of the RTI process. Some of
such abuses specifically mentioned by the Apex Court include initiating
or carrying on proceedings which are wanting in bona-fides or which
are frivolous, vexatious or oppressive. The Apex Court also observed
that in such cases the Court has extensive alternative powers to
prevent an abuse of its process by striking out or staying proceedings or
by prohibiting taking up further proceedings. ...."
Ashok Kumar Pandey vs The State Of West Bengal on 18 November, 2003
4. The Apex Court had discussed the issue of wasteful vexatious litigation in
great detail in the case of Ashok Kumar Pandey vs. The State of West
Bengal, (AIR 2003 SC 280 Para 11), where J. Pasayat had held:
Shail Sahni vs Sanjeev Kumar And Ors. on 5 February, 2014
6. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court also while deciding the case of Shail Sahni
vs. Sanjeev Kumar & Ors. [W.P. (C) 845/2014] has observed that:
Rajni Maindiratta vs Directorate Of Education on 14 June, 2017
In the matter of Rajni Maindiratta- Vs Directorate of Education (North West-
Inst.Of Chartered Accountants Of India vs Shaunak H Sayta & Ors on 2 September, 2011
8. Considering the adverse impact of unmanageable amount of queries, the
Apex Court in a vital decision The Institute of Chartered Accountants of
India Vs. Shaunak H. Satya and Ors, A.I.R 2011 SC 3336) has
categorically cautioned thus:
Article 19 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Centrlal Board Of Sec.Education & Anr vs Aditya Bandopadhyay & Ors on 9 August, 2011
In the other landmark judgement in the case of Central Board of
Secondary Education & Anr. Vs. Aditya Bandopadhyay & Ors., the Apex
Court held as follows:
1