Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 17 (0.23 seconds)

Union Of India And Another vs Central Electrical & Mechanical ... on 1 November, 2007

23. Recently in Union of India v Central Electrical & Mechanical Engg Service (CE & MES Group 'A' (Direct Recruits) Assn., CPWD this Court held (SCC p. 358, para-10) "10. It is now a well-settled principle of law that an executive order must be passed in conformity with the rules. Power of the State Government to issue executive 5 ::: Downloaded on - 17/10/2020 20:18:23 :::HCHP 6 instructions is confined to filling up of the gaps or covering the area which otherwise has not been covered by the existing Rules.
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 58 - S B Sinha - Full Document

D.D.A. And Ors vs Joginder S. Monga And Ors on 12 December, 2003

relevant time, hence in the apposite notification, and when the writ petitioner, initially, meted acquiescing(s) thereto, inasmuch as, in contemporaniety, qua his becoming promoted, to the post of Clerk, from his hitherto post, of, Peon, hence he becomes estopped to cast any valid challenge thereto. Moreover, despite immense time, elapsing since the making, of, the notification, of, 1991, upto, the occurrence, of, a vacancy, against the promotional post, of, Senior Assistant, yet the petitioner being indolent, in improving his educational qualification, hence he is to be construed to abandon, his claims, to, the promotional post, of, Senior Assistant. Significantly, since the post, of, Senior Assistant, does, necessarily, encumber(s), upon the incumbent, to, shoulder more responsibility(ies) than that, of, a Clerk(s), and, also when concomitantly, the holder thereof, is, enjoined to possess all the skill(s) and acumen(s), skill(s) whereof, can become acquired only through his possessing befitting thereto higher educational qualification, than the one appertaining to the lower thereto post(s), whereas, his 10 ::: Downloaded on - 17/10/2020 20:18:23 :::HCHP 11 being slothful, in, making acquisitions thereof. (v) Thereupon he cannot make any befitting reliance, upon, the judgment(s) supra.
Supreme Court of India Cites 21 - Cited by 86 - S B Sinha - Full Document

Ramana Dayaram Shetty vs The International Airport Authority Of ... on 4 May, 1979

24. The power of the Central Government to issue directions as contained in Section 111 of the 1963 Act cannot be stretched to amend the Regulations. Power must be exercised by the Central Government only in regard to the administration of the Trust. Such a power to issue direction must be construed strictly. (See Ramana Dayaram Shetty v. International Airport Authority of India, Harjit Singh v. State of Punjab, Ashoka Smokeless Coal India (p) Ltd. V. Union of India and Poonam Verma v DDA)
Supreme Court of India Cites 47 - Cited by 2519 - P N Bhagwati - Full Document

Harjit Singh And Ors. vs State Of Punjab on 16 August, 2002

24. The power of the Central Government to issue directions as contained in Section 111 of the 1963 Act cannot be stretched to amend the Regulations. Power must be exercised by the Central Government only in regard to the administration of the Trust. Such a power to issue direction must be construed strictly. (See Ramana Dayaram Shetty v. International Airport Authority of India, Harjit Singh v. State of Punjab, Ashoka Smokeless Coal India (p) Ltd. V. Union of India and Poonam Verma v DDA)
Supreme Court of India Cites 13 - Cited by 242 - Full Document

M/S Ashoka Smokeless Coal Ind. P. Ltd. & ... vs Union Of India & Ors on 1 December, 2006

24. The power of the Central Government to issue directions as contained in Section 111 of the 1963 Act cannot be stretched to amend the Regulations. Power must be exercised by the Central Government only in regard to the administration of the Trust. Such a power to issue direction must be construed strictly. (See Ramana Dayaram Shetty v. International Airport Authority of India, Harjit Singh v. State of Punjab, Ashoka Smokeless Coal India (p) Ltd. V. Union of India and Poonam Verma v DDA)
Supreme Court of India Cites 66 - Cited by 181 - S B Sinha - Full Document

Poonam Verma & Ors vs Delhi Development Authority on 13 December, 2007

24. The power of the Central Government to issue directions as contained in Section 111 of the 1963 Act cannot be stretched to amend the Regulations. Power must be exercised by the Central Government only in regard to the administration of the Trust. Such a power to issue direction must be construed strictly. (See Ramana Dayaram Shetty v. International Airport Authority of India, Harjit Singh v. State of Punjab, Ashoka Smokeless Coal India (p) Ltd. V. Union of India and Poonam Verma v DDA)
Supreme Court of India Cites 20 - Cited by 79 - S B Sinha - Full Document
1   2 Next