Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 25 (0.80 seconds)Section 11 in The Punjab Co-operative Societies Rules, 1963 [Entire Act]
Section 11 in The Co-Operative Societies Act, 1912 [Entire Act]
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 27 in The Punjab Co-operative Societies Rules, 1963 [Entire Act]
The Punjab Co-operative Societies Rules, 1963
Hari Shanker Jain vs Sonia Gandhi on 12 September, 2001
In our view, the decision of the Apex Court in Hari Shanker Jain v. Sonia Gandhi does not lend any support to the respondents' contention, but on the contrary buttresses the view taken by us in the judgment dated 11.5.2007 that the Election Tribunal under Rule 28 of the APMC Rules does not have any jurisdiction to entertain any challenge to legality or validity of a general license granted to a trader because Section 27 of the Act provides a specific forum and machinery for deciding all such disputes regarding grant or renewal of a license. In our view, therefore, the judgment dated 11.5.2007 in the case of APMC, Kalawad (Special Civil Application No. 6482 of 2007) does not require any reconsideration.
Pundlik vs State Of Maharashtra & Ors on 25 August, 2005
32. As regards the decision of the Full Bench, we have already considered the same in paragraphs 27 to 29 of our judgment dated 11.5.2007. For the reasons already indicated therein, and particularly in view of the decision of the Apex Court in Pundlik v. State of Maharashtra , the High Court may in the facts of a given case entertain a petition challenging the legality of the list of voters, even after commencement of the election process, if the list is not prepared in accordance with law. We are conscious of the fact that ordinarily this Court is not to entertain petitions after commencement of the election process. However, in the instant case, we have not entertained any disputed question of fact. In fact, the petitioners' challenge to the registration of the co-operative society is not entertained by us as machinery for entertaining such challenge is specifically created under the Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act and for the purposes of these petitions, we proceed on the demurer that the registration of the three co-operative societies in question was granted in accordance with the provisions of the Co-operative Societies Act Even proceeding on that basis, we have found that the three co-operative societies had not been registered either on the date on which the Director issued the notification dated 23.3.2007 fixing the date of election or even on 14.4.2007 i.e. the relevant date by which date the names were required to be communicated to the Authorized Officer under Sub-rule (1) of Rule 7 of the APMC Rules for preparation of three separate lists of voters.
Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing Act 1966
Election Commission Of India Through ... vs Ashok Kumar & Ors on 30 August, 2000
33. As regards various other decisions sought to be relied upon by Mr Mangukia, we do not think that it is necessary to deal with the same because except one, they were rendered prior to the decisions of the Apex Court in Election Commission of India v. Ashok Kumar and in Pundlik v. State of Maharashtra .