Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 36 (0.39 seconds)Section 102 in The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
S.N. Mukherjee vs Union Of India on 28 August, 1990
"8. The purpose of disclosure of reasons, as held by a Constitution Bench
of this Court in S.N. Mukherjee v. Union of India (supra), is that people
must have confidence in the judicial or quasi-judicial authorities. Unless
reasons are disclosed, how can a person know whether the authority has
applied its mind or not? Also, giving of reasons minimises the chances of
arbitrariness. Hence, it is an essential requirement of the rule of law
that some reasons, at least in brief, must be disclosed in a judicial or
quasi-judicial order, even if it is an order of affirmation."
Karnataka State Road Transport ... vs Ashrafulla Khan And Others on 14 January, 2002
36. The view of the High Court in Ashrafulla (supra) has been reversed by
this Court. The decision is of retrospective operation, as it has not been
laid down that it would operate prospectively; more so, in the case of
reversal of the judgment.
Gullapalli Nageswara Rao And Others vs Andhra Pradesh State Road ... on 5 November, 1958
Provided that the State transport undertaking may, with the previous
approval of the State Government, modify without following the procedure
laid down in Section 68-C and Section 68-D, any such scheme relating to any
route or area in respect of which the road transport services are run and
operated by the State transport undertaking to the complete exclusion of
other persons in respect of the following matters, namely, --
Mysore State Road Transport ... vs Mysore State Transport Appellate ... on 8 August, 1974
A Constitution Bench of this Court in Adarsh Travels Bus
Service v. State of U.P. distinguished the decision in Ram Sanehi Singh v.
Bihar SRTC for having been decided on particular facts of its case but did
not approve it. However, the decision in Mysore SRTC v. Mysore Revenue
Appellate Tribunal was expressly not approved, whereas the decision in
Mysore SRTC v. Mysore State Transport Appellate Tribunal was approved. The
Constitution Bench settled the law by laying down that once a Scheme is for
total exclusion prohibiting private operators from plying stage carriages
on a whole or part of a notified route, no permit can be granted on the
notified route or portion thereof."
Mysore State Road Transport ... vs The Mysore Revenue Appellate Tribunal & ... on 17 May, 1974
A Constitution Bench of this Court in Adarsh Travels Bus
Service v. State of U.P. distinguished the decision in Ram Sanehi Singh v.
Bihar SRTC for having been decided on particular facts of its case but did
not approve it. However, the decision in Mysore SRTC v. Mysore Revenue
Appellate Tribunal was expressly not approved, whereas the decision in
Mysore SRTC v. Mysore State Transport Appellate Tribunal was approved. The
Constitution Bench settled the law by laying down that once a Scheme is for
total exclusion prohibiting private operators from plying stage carriages
on a whole or part of a notified route, no permit can be granted on the
notified route or portion thereof."
Adarsh Travels Bus Service & Anr vs State Of U.P. & Ors on 17 October, 1985
In Adarsh Travels (supra), this Court has laid down thus :