Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 11 (0.36 seconds)Behari Kunj Sahkari Awas Samiti & Anr vs State Of U.P. & Ors on 14 August, 1997
In "Behari Kunj Sahkari Awas Samiti and another Vs.
State of U.P. and others" reported in (1997) 7 SCC 37, the
Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that since the order dated
11.11.1982 of the Custodian of Evacuee Property was
approved by the Assistant Custodian General of Evacuee
Property, who was acting as delegate of Custodian General,
the order was rightly not reviewed by the Custodian
General when revision application under Section 27 of the
Administration of Evacuee Property Act, 1950 was preferred
before the Custodian General.
H.C. Suman And Anr vs Rehabilitation Ministry Employees ... on 29 August, 1991
15. By order dated 17.2.2004, the order dated
24.12.2002 has been recalled on the ground that
subsequently the Law Department rendered different
opinion in the matter. In my considered opinion this is not
permissible in Law. The order passed by this Court on
15.7.2002 in Cont.(C) case No. 465 of 2002 is clear and
unambiguous. The Respondent-State of Jharkhand was
directed to accord identical, same and similar
reliefs/benefits to the petitioner as were given to the said
Shakti Ranjan Nag. Such order of the Court cannot be varied
or modified by an executive order denying the petitioner
relief similar to the said Shakti Ranjan Nag.
State Of Orissa & Others vs Commissioner Of Land Records & ... on 27 August, 1998
Godde Venkateswara Rao vs Government Of Andhra Pradesh And Others on 11 October, 1965
In "Gadde Venkateswara Rao, Vs. Government of
Andhra Pradesh and others" reported in A.I.R 1966 SC 828,
where question for consideration before the Hon'ble
Supreme Court was whether in exercise of powers under
Section 62 of the Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Samithis and
Zila Parishads Act (35 of 1959) the government has power
to cancel or suspend the resolution of a Panchayat Samithi,
the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed as under,
R.T. Rangachari vs Secretary Of State on 19 December, 1933
In "R.T. Rangachari Vs.
Secretary of State", reported in A.I.R. 1937 Privy Council 27,
it has been held,
"In a case in which after Government Officials,
duly competent and duly authorized in that
6
behalf, have arrived honestly at one decision,
their successors in office, after the decision has
been acted upon and is in effective operation,
cannot purport to enter upon a
reconsideration of the matter and to arrive at
another and totally different decision."