Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 20 (0.23 seconds)
M/S Gurmit Singh Sardara Singh And Ali ... vs State Of Punjab And Ors on 20 December, 2016 cites

Amarjit Singh vs State Transport Appellate Tribunal Pb ... on 24 February, 2016

(25) It is an admitted fact that Clause 8(ii) of the Scheme dated 09.08.1990 was struck down by this Court in CWP No.11995 of 1992 (Amarjit Singh vs. State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Punjab & Ors.) decided on 21.05.1993. The said judgment attained finality. (26) The State of Punjab made a second attempt through its modified Scheme notified on 21.10.1997 when it substituted Clause 7 of the original Scheme by way of a new Clause 7-A to provide that "while granting permits for operation on routes, linking one village with another village without any city or a town or Municipality, in between the aforesaid two villages, or a route linking a village with the block headquarter or a 13 of 16 ::: Downloaded on - 25-12-2016 18:17:35 ::: RA-CW-263-2016 - 14 -
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 3 - R K Jain - Full Document

Jagdip Singh vs Jagir Chand And Another on 10 October, 2001

4 of 16 ::: Downloaded on - 25-12-2016 18:17:35 ::: RA-CW-263-2016 -5- (6) Similarly, Clause-7A of the modified Scheme dated 21.10.1997 which gave advantage to the Mini Bus Operators for the grant of permits for operation on routes linking villages without any city, town or municipal area in between, was also struck down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Jagdip Singh v. Jagir Chand & Anr., (2001) 8 SCC 437 and Subhash Chander & Anr. Vs. State Transport Appellate Tribunal & Ors. (2002) 4 SCC 168, laying down that when the STUs were not to operate on the routes covered under the offending clause then there was no question of framing any Scheme.
Supreme Court of India Cites 16 - Cited by 12 - Full Document
1   2 Next