Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.24 seconds)
Amit Kr. Nandi And 42 Ors. vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. And Ors. on 24 December, 2003 cites

Tata Cellular vs Union Of India on 26 July, 1994

22. Mr. Ghosh appearing for the respondents authorities submitted that neither there is discrimination nor there is violation of principles of natural justice. Mr. Ghosh further submitted that 15% quota is exclusively segregated and they arc to face competitive examination and if there is vacancy out of these 15% quota those vacancies cannot be filled up by candidates from 35% quota. Naturally there is no reason as to why the petitioners will be affected by relaxation of standard which is the result of a policy decision of the authority. Mr. Ghosh relied on the following decisions and submitted that judicial review of the administrative action is confined to a specific reason. Mr. Ghosh submitted that if reference is made of the decision made in the case of Tata Cellular (supra) then also it will be seen that the Hon'ble Apex Court has restricted the zone of interference in case of judicial review and has observed that the duty of the court is to convince itself to the question of legality. Its concern should be: (1) Whether a decision making authority exceeded its power, (2) Committed an error of law, (3) Committed a breach of the rules of natural justice, (4) Reached a decision which no reasonable Tribunal would have reached or (5) Abused its powers.
Supreme Court of India Cites 33 - Cited by 3275 - S Mohan - Full Document

Erusian Equipment & Chemicals Ltd vs State Of West Bengal & Anr on 11 November, 1974

Chemicals Ltd. v. State of West Bengal this Court observed as under (SCC p. 75, para 17).' 'When the Government is trading with the public, "the democratic form of Government demands equality and absence of arbitrariness and discrimination in such transactions", the activities of the Government have public element and, therefore, there should be fairness and equality. The State need not enter into any contract with anyone but if it does so, it must do so fairly without discrimination and without unfair procedure.'
Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 774 - A N Ray - Full Document

Suresh Koshy George vs The University Of Kerala & Ors on 15 July, 1968

Enquiries which were considered administrative at one time are now being considered as quasi-judicial in character. Arriving at a just decision is the aim of both quasi-judicial enquiries as well as administrative enquiries. An unjust decision in an administrative enquiry may have more far reaching effect than a decision in a quasi-judicial enquiry. As observed by this Court in Suresh Koshy George v. The University of Kerala the rules of natural justice are not embodied rules. What particular rule of natural justice should apply to a given case must depend to a great extent on the facts and circumstances of that case, the framework of the law under which the enquiry is held and the constitution of the Tribunal or body of persons appointed for that purpose. Whatever a complaint is made before a Court that some principle of natural justice had been contravened the Court has to decide whether the observance of that rule was necessary for a just decision on the facts of the case."
Supreme Court of India Cites 9 - Cited by 348 - K S Hegde - Full Document
1