Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 9 of 9 (0.27 seconds)Section 20 in The Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 [Entire Act]
P.K. Ramachandran vs State Of Kerala & Anr on 19 September, 1997
13. We have gone through the decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court and
the Hon'ble High Court of Orissa cited by the Ld. Counsel for the
applicant. The Hon'ble High Court of Orissa, no doubt, has quashed the
order wherein this Tribunal dismissed the OA filed by Kalyan Ranjan
Sahao on the ground of limitation based on facts of the said case. The
present being different and distinct, the decision in Kalyan Ranjan Sahoo
case has no application in this case.
Section 19 in The Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 [Entire Act]
The Right to Information Act, 2005
S.S. Rathore vs State Of Madhya Pradesh on 6 September, 1989
In this regard, learned counsel for the Respondents has also
relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
S.S.Rathore vs State of MP, AIR VAG SC LO.
Article 14 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Chennai Metropolitan Water ... vs T.T. Murali Babu on 10 February, 2014
Similarly, the decision of the Hon'ble
Apex Court in Tukaram Kanha joshi {supra} case holding that when
substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each
other, the cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred, has no
application to the present case in view of the specific decision of the
Hon'ble Apex Court In the cases of D.CS.Negi {supra} and Chennai
Metropolitan (supra).
West Bengal Forest Development Corp. ... vs M/S. J. K. Paper Ltd on 5 October, 2021
In the case of Uttaranchal Forest Develapment Corpn. and
another v. J
abar Singh and others (2007) 2SCC 1 12, the Hon'ble Apex
wa QA 26Q/UO7 33 of MG
Court was pleased to observe as under;
1