Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (0.25 seconds)

Ishwar Singh vs State Of Rajasthan And Ors on 5 January, 2005

19. Moreover, this Court is also of the considered view that the reliance placed by learned counsel for the respondents on the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ishwar Singh's case (supra) is misplaced. The said decision was rendered in the context of a distinct set of service rules, which did not contain any provision pari materia to Rule 14(d) of the Rules of 13 of 14 ::: Downloaded on - 12-11-2025 21:30:27 ::: CWP-32047 & 33635-2019 -14- 1990, which expressly accords finality to the orders passed by the competent authority in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction. CONCLUSION
Supreme Court of India Cites 21 - Cited by 15 - A Pasayat - Full Document

Dadi Jagannadham vs Jammulu Ramulu & Ors on 23 August, 2001

14. A fundamental rule, while engaging in interpretation of statutes, is to ensure that the legislative intent is not defeated. Moreover, where the provision is spelt out in an unambiguous manner, the same must be interpreted in a way, that is natural and grammatically sound, unless doing so could lead to injustice or absurdity. Where the statute is clear in its intention and terminology, there is no reason to engage in the exercise of interpretation. A Constitution Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Dadi Jagannadham Vs. Jammulu Ramulu, (2001) 7 SCC 71, speaking through Justice S.N. Variava, observed as under :-
Supreme Court of India Cites 10 - Cited by 169 - S N Variava - Full Document
1