Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 17 (0.30 seconds)Maneka Gandhi vs Union Of India on 25 January, 1978
In Maneka Gandhi vs. Union of
India (supra) (vide paragraphs 56 to 61) it was held that natural justice is
part of Article 14 of the Constitution.
Union Of India & Anr vs S.K. Goel & Ors on 12 February, 2007
Since the aforesaid decision in Union of India vs. S.K.
Goel (supra) has not considered the aforesaid Constitution Bench decision
in Maneka Gandhi's case (supra), it cannot be said to have laid down the
correct law.
U.P. Jal Nigam & Others vs Prabhat Chandra Jain & Others on 31 January, 1996
In U.P. Jal Nigam's case (supra) there is only a stray observation "if
the graded entry is of going a step down, like falling from 'very good' to
'good' that may not ordinarily be an adverse entry since both are a positive
grading". There is no discussion about the question whether such 'good'
grading can also have serious adverse consequences as it may virtually
eliminate the chances of promotion of the incumbent if there is a benchmark
requiring 'very good' entry. And even when there is no benchmark, such
downgrading can have serious adverse effect on an incumbent's chances of
promotion where comparative merit of several candidates is considered.
Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. And ... vs N.R. Vairamani And Anr on 1 October, 2004
As observed in Bharat Petroleum
Corporation Ltd. vs. N.R. Vairamani AIR 2004 SC 4778 (vide para 9):
A. K. Kraipak & Ors. Etc vs Union Of India & Ors on 29 April, 1969
However, subsequently, as noted in A.K. Kraipak's case (supra) and K.L.
Shephard's case (supra), some more rules came to be added to the rules of
18
natural justice, e.g. the requirement to give reasons vide S.N. Mukherji vs.
Union of India AIR 1990 SC 1984.
Vijay Kumar, I.A.S. vs State Of Maharashtra And Ors. on 30 August, 1988
8. Learned counsel for the respondent relied on a decision of this Court
in Vijay Kumar vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. 1988 (Supp) SCC 674
in which it was held that an un-communicated adverse report should not
form the foundation to deny the benefits to a government servant when
similar benefits are extended to his juniors.
Kumaon Mandal Vikas Nigam Ltd vs Girja Shankar Pant & Ors on 18 October, 2000
In Kumaon Mandal Vikas Nigam Ltd. vs. Girja Shankar Pant
AIR 2001 SC 24, this Court held (vide para 2):
Mohinder Singh Gill & Anr vs The Chiief Election Commissioner, New ... on 2 December, 1977
35. In Swadesh Cotton Mills etc. vs. Union of India etc. AIR 1981 SC
818, this Court following the decision in Mohinder Singh Gill & Anr. vs.
The Chief Election Commissioner & Ors. AIR 1978 SC 851 held that the
soul of the rule (natural justice) is fair play in action.
S.N. Mukherjee vs Union Of India on 28 August, 1990
However, subsequently, as noted in A.K. Kraipak's case (supra) and K.L.
Shephard's case (supra), some more rules came to be added to the rules of
18
natural justice, e.g. the requirement to give reasons vide S.N. Mukherji vs.
Union of India AIR 1990 SC 1984.