Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.34 seconds)Director Of Elementary Education vs Tmt.S. Vigila on 4 November, 2006
Order made in W.A(MD)No.205 of 2007 dated 09.06.2007
''This writ appeal is filed against the order dated 08.12.2006 made in
W.P.Nos.10350 to 10352 of 2006, wherein the relief of issuance of a writ of
Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the order
passed by the District Elementary Educational Officer, Tirunelveli in passing
redeployment order by construing that there are certain excess teachers with
reference to G.O.Ms.No.525 School Education (D1) Department dated 29.12.1997.
The said G.O. was the subject matter of the Full Bench decision in the case
of Director of Elementary Education v. S.Vigila reported in [2006(5) CTC
385], wherein it was held as follows:
State Of Karnataka And Ors. vs N. Parameshwarappa And Ors. on 9 October, 2002
(i) In the decision in State of Karnataka vs. N.Parameshwarappa
reported in 2003(12) SCC 192, at paragraph 8, it is held thus:
N.S.Balasubramanian vs Food Corporation on 17 April, 2006
?3. It was lastly contended by the learned counsel for the appellants
that whereas the petition had been filed by only Respondent 1, the High Court
while finally concluding the matter has given a direction to promote all
those who were senior to the appellants even though they were not parties to
the petition. Once the High Court had placed a particular interpretation on
the Rules, the benefit of that interpretation had to go to all those who
qualified under the seniority-cum-merit rule. There was no point in waiting
for each and every person to file a petition. Therefore, we do not see any
reason why we should entertain such a technical plea when the High Court has
done substantial justice to all concerned. The above referred Supreme Court
decisions were followed by me in 2006(2) MLJ 572 (N.S.BALASUBRMANIAN V. FOOD
CORPORATION OF INDIA). The said order was challenged in W.A.No.956/2006 and
the same was dismissed on 30.10.2006 and S.L.P.(C) No.677/2007 filed against
the Division Bench order was also dismissed by the Supreme Court on
23.04.2007.
Tamil Nadu Housing Board vs Mrs.Uma Maheswari Ramasamy ..1St on 16 August, 2011
The Division Bench of this Court in the
decision reported in 2011 (5) CTC 503 (TAMIL NADU HOUSING BOARD V. UMA
MAHESWARI RAMASWAMY) held that there must not be discrimination in land
acquisition proceedings.
The Land Acquisition Act, 1894
1