Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.22 seconds)

Ramesh Chandra Shah & Ors vs Anil Joshi & Ors on 3 April, 2013

In view of the propositions laid down in the abovenoted judgments, it must be held that by having taken part in the process of selection with full knowledge that the recruitment was being made under the General Rules, the respondents had waived their right to question the advertisement or the methodology adopted by the Board for making selection and the learned Single Judge and the Division Bench of the High Court committed grave error by entertaining the grievance made by the respondents."
Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 434 - G S Singhvi - Full Document

Mohinder Singh Gill & Anr vs The Chiief Election Commissioner, New ... on 2 December, 1977

11. The Learned Single Judge has observed that the findings of the Committee report are not mentioned in express terms in the order dated 10.3.2015 but because there is a reference therein to the Committee constituted for inquiry it could safely be gathered that this aspect of the matter was also a part of the decision making process and the Respondents were not building up a fresh case before the Court in their counter-affidavit beyond the order dated 10.3.2015 holding that Mohinder Singh Gill (supra) had no application to the facts of the case. We regret our inability to concur with the same in view of the clear and express recitals in the order dated 10.3.2015 which admits of no ambiguity whatsoever read along with the counter affidavit also. To read the report into it would tantamount to including something that the government itself had excluded. Further, it is not permissible for the Respondents to argue contrary to the order dated 10.3.2015, and urge that it is also based on the enquiry report especially when the counter-affidavit avers that other complaints were found baseless.
Supreme Court of India Cites 56 - Cited by 4221 - V R Iyer - Full Document

Hindustan Petroleum Corpn. Ltd vs Darius Shapur Chenai & Ors on 20 September, 2005

10. An order passed by the Government or Government functionaries will have to be tested on the basis of recitals contained in the order and it is not open for the functionaries to explain the order or improve upon it by a counter-affidavit. (1978)1 SCC 405 (Mohinder Singh Gill v. Chief Election Commissioner, New Delhi) has been followed in (2005) 7 SCC 627 (Hindustan Petroleum Corpn. Ltd. v. Darius Shapur Chenai ) observing :-
Supreme Court of India Cites 36 - Cited by 542 - S B Sinha - Full Document
1