Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 26 (0.42 seconds)

M/S. Heinz India Pvt. Ltd. & Anr vs State Of U.P. & Ors on 23 March, 2012

34. The submission is that 'Director' exercised power delegated to it by Board under Section 33 and it is not Director's any of his functions under Act, 1964 and, therefore, Section 2(h) which defines "Director" will not include within its ambit Deputy Director, Varanasi who has decided the Revision in question. I find that almost similar question has been considered by Supreme Court in Heinz India Pvt. Ltd. and others Vs. State of U.P. and others (2012) 5 SCC 443 wherein also Revision was decided by an Officer authorized by Director and Court said as under:
Supreme Court of India Cites 29 - Cited by 114 - T S Thakur - Full Document
1   2 3 Next