Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 17 (0.24 seconds)Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 142 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Union Of India And Anr vs Kirloskar Pneumatic Companylimited on 6 May, 1996
Apart from relying on the same very judgment quoted by the petitioners and distinguishing some of those judgments, the respondents referred to the judgment in the cases of Dr. D.C. Wadhwa and others Vs. State of Bihar and others , Union of India and another Vs. Kirloskar Pneumatic Company Limited reported in JT 1996 (5) SC 26, Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Chandan Nagar, West Bengal Vs. Dunlop India Limited and others , State of West Bengal and others Vs. Calcutta Hardware Stores and others , Syndicate Bank and another Vs. K. Umesh Nayak reported in 1994 (5) SCC 572, State of Haryana and another Vs. Chanan Mal etc.
Assistant Collector Of Central Excise ... vs Dunlop India Ltd. And Ors on 30 November, 1984
Apart from relying on the same very judgment quoted by the petitioners and distinguishing some of those judgments, the respondents referred to the judgment in the cases of Dr. D.C. Wadhwa and others Vs. State of Bihar and others , Union of India and another Vs. Kirloskar Pneumatic Company Limited reported in JT 1996 (5) SC 26, Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Chandan Nagar, West Bengal Vs. Dunlop India Limited and others , State of West Bengal and others Vs. Calcutta Hardware Stores and others , Syndicate Bank and another Vs. K. Umesh Nayak reported in 1994 (5) SCC 572, State of Haryana and another Vs. Chanan Mal etc.
State Of West Bengal & Ors vs Calcutta Hardware Stores & Ors on 20 February, 1986
Apart from relying on the same very judgment quoted by the petitioners and distinguishing some of those judgments, the respondents referred to the judgment in the cases of Dr. D.C. Wadhwa and others Vs. State of Bihar and others , Union of India and another Vs. Kirloskar Pneumatic Company Limited reported in JT 1996 (5) SC 26, Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Chandan Nagar, West Bengal Vs. Dunlop India Limited and others , State of West Bengal and others Vs. Calcutta Hardware Stores and others , Syndicate Bank and another Vs. K. Umesh Nayak reported in 1994 (5) SCC 572, State of Haryana and another Vs. Chanan Mal etc.
Syndicate Bank & Anr vs K. Umesh Nayak & Ors on 13 September, 1994
Apart from relying on the same very judgment quoted by the petitioners and distinguishing some of those judgments, the respondents referred to the judgment in the cases of Dr. D.C. Wadhwa and others Vs. State of Bihar and others , Union of India and another Vs. Kirloskar Pneumatic Company Limited reported in JT 1996 (5) SC 26, Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Chandan Nagar, West Bengal Vs. Dunlop India Limited and others , State of West Bengal and others Vs. Calcutta Hardware Stores and others , Syndicate Bank and another Vs. K. Umesh Nayak reported in 1994 (5) SCC 572, State of Haryana and another Vs. Chanan Mal etc.
State Of Haryana & Anr vs Chanan Mal Etc on 18 March, 1976
Apart from relying on the same very judgment quoted by the petitioners and distinguishing some of those judgments, the respondents referred to the judgment in the cases of Dr. D.C. Wadhwa and others Vs. State of Bihar and others , Union of India and another Vs. Kirloskar Pneumatic Company Limited reported in JT 1996 (5) SC 26, Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Chandan Nagar, West Bengal Vs. Dunlop India Limited and others , State of West Bengal and others Vs. Calcutta Hardware Stores and others , Syndicate Bank and another Vs. K. Umesh Nayak reported in 1994 (5) SCC 572, State of Haryana and another Vs. Chanan Mal etc.
Abdul Rehman Antulay & Ors vs R.S. Nayak & Anr on 10 December, 1991
(b) High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution was Court of sub..... and was not meant to give semantic direction. There was no juristic basis to give such directions and infact giving such directions would be contrary to the provisions of the Act and the same being not permissible in view of the observations of the Supreme Court in Abdul Rehman Antulay Vs. R.S. Nayak case . What could not be done directly cannot be allowed to be done indirectly. Giving such directions would amount to allowing the contract workers to continue even when they were not entitled to any such relief finally. Infact giving such interim relief would amount to giving final relief.