Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (1.05 seconds)
Hemant Kumar Sanwaria And Ors vs State (Personnel Depar)And Ors on 17 December, 2013 cites

Arjun Singh Rathore & Ors vs B.N.Chaturvedi & Ors on 12 October, 2007

In support of his arguments, Mr. Pareek has placed reliance on the decisions of the Apex Court in Arjun Singh Rathore And Others Vs. B.N. Chaturvedi And Others, (2007) 11 SCC 605, Kalabharati Advertising Vs. Hemant Vimalnath Narichania And Others, (2010) 9 SCC 437, P. Mohanan Pillai Vs. State of Kerala And Others, (2007) 9 SCC 497 and Southern Petrochemical Industries Co. Ltd. Vs. Electricity Inspector & ETIO And Others, (2007) 5 SCC 447.
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 81 - H S Bedi - Full Document

Kalabharati Advertising vs Hemant Vimalnath Narichania & Ors on 6 September, 2010

In support of his arguments, Mr. Pareek has placed reliance on the decisions of the Apex Court in Arjun Singh Rathore And Others Vs. B.N. Chaturvedi And Others, (2007) 11 SCC 605, Kalabharati Advertising Vs. Hemant Vimalnath Narichania And Others, (2010) 9 SCC 437, P. Mohanan Pillai Vs. State of Kerala And Others, (2007) 9 SCC 497 and Southern Petrochemical Industries Co. Ltd. Vs. Electricity Inspector & ETIO And Others, (2007) 5 SCC 447.
Supreme Court of India Cites 32 - Cited by 507 - B S Chauhan - Full Document

P. Mohanan Pillai vs State Of Kerala & Ors on 23 February, 2007

Vis-a-vis the plea of application of unamended rules to the post that had fallen vacant prior to the amendment, we construe it sufficient to refer to the observation of the Hon'ble Apex Court in P. Mohanan Pillai (supra), wherein their Lordships had propounded that ordinarily rules which were prevailing at the time, when the vacancies arose, ought to be adhered to and the eligibility criteria as well as the procedure prevailing on the date of vacancy should be ordinarily followed but for good and sufficient reasons, departure therefrom is permissible.
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 348 - S B Sinha - Full Document

Southern Petrochemical Industries Co. ... vs Electricity Inspector And E.T.I.O. & ... on 15 May, 2007

In support of his arguments, Mr. Pareek has placed reliance on the decisions of the Apex Court in Arjun Singh Rathore And Others Vs. B.N. Chaturvedi And Others, (2007) 11 SCC 605, Kalabharati Advertising Vs. Hemant Vimalnath Narichania And Others, (2010) 9 SCC 437, P. Mohanan Pillai Vs. State of Kerala And Others, (2007) 9 SCC 497 and Southern Petrochemical Industries Co. Ltd. Vs. Electricity Inspector & ETIO And Others, (2007) 5 SCC 447.
Supreme Court of India Cites 120 - Cited by 204 - S B Sinha - Full Document

Shanker Raju vs Union Of India on 4 January, 2011

Per contra, Ms. Raj Sharma has abided by the pleaded stand of the respondent-State to contend that challenge to the validity of the amendment as well as selection process, is wholly misconceived and thus, the petitions are liable to be rejected in limine. As the requirement of proficiency, in shorthand and expertise both in English and Hindi, is the demand of the official exigencies as on date, the initiative to make it optional would be at the cost of efficiency of the administration and quality of service and thus against the public interest. She has, thus, submitted that on this touchstone alone, the challenge ought to fail. A reference to the decision of the Apex Court in Shanker Raju Vs. Union of India, (2011) 2 SCC 132, to underline that a Court ought to give full effect to the legislative intent, as discernible in the statute, has been made.
Supreme Court of India Cites 29 - Cited by 82 - H L Dattu - Full Document
1