history and in the substantial sense, the amending enactment embodies a hostile discrimination against the landlords of non-residential premises, without a reasonable basis ... attack on Amending Act XI of 1964 both upon grounds of hostile discrimination, and infringement of rights guaranteed under Article 19.
28. The argument based
history and in the substantial sense, the amending enactment embodies a hostile discrimination against the landlords of non-residential premises without a reasonable basis ... attack on Amending Act 11 of 1964, both upon grounds of hostile discrimination and infringement of rights guaranteed under Art 19.
(28) The argument based
Judge has also held in para. 6 while considering the case hostile discrimination put forward by the appellant observed as follows:
The last ... service and hence, the petitioner alone has been subjected to a hostile discrimination. This plea cannot be sustained. The petitioner played the principal roll
registered dealer who is dealing in cane jaggery,, complains of hostile discrimination by reason of the notification of the Government in G.O. 2261 dated ... alone is ex facie obnoxious and by itself is suggestive of hostile discrimination. In other respects the particulars furnished disclose that there has been
find any merits in the appeal. On the question of hostile discrimination put forward by the petitioner, it is submitted by the respondent that ... Judge has also held in para - 6 while considering the case hostile discrimination but forward by the appellant observed as follows :
"The last
failure to extend the protection to them amounts to a hostile discrimination. (History of the principle traced.) Case law fully discussed.
S. Ramachandra Iyer
levelled with any
departmental action and therefore, the plea of hostile discrimination was
raised. Certain sequence of events narrated by the petitioner raises a serious ... favour of the
employee therein.
42. Following these principles of hostile discrimination, which the
Hon'ble Supreme Court termed it as perversity
J.Alex Ponseelan vs The Director General Of Police on 27 February, 2014
Author: R
time. This amounts to an invidious and hostile discrimination against the petitioners and violates Article 14. The section also confers on the Income-tax Officer ... learned counsel for the petitioners, is an invidious and hostile discrimination against the assessees like the petitioners and therefore Section 140A(3) is violative
concerned, it is submitted by petitioners that there is a hostile discrimination and it acts as an unreasonable restriction on their trade ... imposition of the same rate of levy of fees is hostile discrimination and an unreasonable restriction on 'the petitioners' trade. As to what
