IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WP( C ) NO (IN THE MATTER OF PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION)

Save this PDF as:

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WP( C ) NO (IN THE MATTER OF PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION)"

Transcription

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WP( C ) NO (IN THE MATTER OF PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION) IN THE MATTER OF : JOGINDER KUMAR SUKHIJA S/o Sh.Prabhu Dayal Sukhija R/o 174, IInd Floor, Avtar Enclave, Paschim Vihar New Delhi PETITIONER VERSUS 1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Shastri Bhavan, New Delhi. 2. Bar Council of India, Through its Chairman, 21, Rouse Avenue Institutional Area, Near Bal Bhawan, New Delhi ID: 3. University of Delhi Through The Vice Chancellor Maurice Nagar,Delhi ID: 4. Faculty of Law, Through its Dean,

2 University of Delhi, Maurice Nagar,Delhi ID: RESPONDENTS IN THE MATTER OF: WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND IN THE MATTER OF: CONSTITUTIONAL VALIDITY OF CLAUSE 5 A OF SCHEDULE III OF RULES OF LEGAL EDUCATION 2008 AS ENACTED BY BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA UNDER SECTIONS 7(1)(h) AND (i), 24(1)(c)(iii), AND (iiia), 49(1)(af),(ag), AND (d) OF THE ADVOCATES ACT, 1961; AND IN THE MATTER OF: VIOLATION OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AS GUARANTEED TO THE PETITIONER UNDER ARTICLES 14 AND 21 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA; AND WRIT PETITION IN THE NATURE OF PUBLIC INTREST LITIGATION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA SEEKING INDULGENCE OF THIS HON BLE COURT TO ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE MANDAMUS AND/OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT/DIRECTION/ORDER THEREBY DIRECTING RESPONDENTS TO ADMIT 2310 STUDENTS IN LAW FACULTY, DELHI UNIVERSITY

3 To The Hon ble Chief Justice And His Companion Judges Delhi High Court,New Delhi Most Respectfully Showeth : THE HUMBLE PETITION OF THE PETITIONER IS AS UDNER: 1. That the Petitioner is a bonafide citizen of India and is invoking extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Hon ble Court for the public interest as he does not have any personal interest involve in the present litigation. It is stated that the present petition is not guided by self gain or for gain to any other person/institution/body. It is stated that the Petitioner has no motive other than of Public Interest in filing the present Writ Petition. 2. That the Petitioner has come to know about the facts stated in the present petition after reading and watching news in media and also through information available on Television, newspapers, internet etc. The Petitioner has filed representations in this regard, however the Respondents are not responding. 3. That the present Writ Petition has been filed for the benefit of large number of citizens who have suffered due to wrong policy of admissions adopted by the Colleges affiliated with the Respondent No.3. It is humbly submitted that all such persons are not able to approach this Hon ble Court to seek the relief claimed in the present petition, as most of them are students. That the present petition, as per the knowledge of the Petitioner shall not adversely affect any person/body/institution. 4. That the Petitioner is a law graduate from Campus Law Center, Delhi University and Lawyer/Advocate by profession having great interest in the Social Issues. It is stated that the Petitioner has the means to pay the cost, if any, imposed by this Hon ble Court.

4 5. That before filing the present Petition, the Petitioner filed representations with the Respondents through s, however has not received any response from Respondents. The representation was mailed on Copies thereof is annexed as ANNEXURE P-1 (Colly). 6. That the Petitioner has previously filed a Public Interest Litigation bearing petition no. W.P (C) 7871/2016 and W.P (C) 4581/2017, both are pending adjudication before this Hon ble Court. 7. That the Respondent No.1 is engaged in bringing world class opportunities of higher education and research to the student of India and is engaged in formulating the National Policy on Education and to ensure that it is implemented in letter and spirit 8. That the Respondent No.2 is a statutory body created by Parliament to regulate and represent the Indian bar. It performs the regulatory function by prescribing standards of professional conduct and etiquette and by exercising disciplinary jurisdiction over the bar. It also sets standards for legal education and grants recognition to Universities whose degree in law will serve as qualification for enrolment as an advocate. 9. That the Respondent No.3 is central university financed by public funds, the Respondent No.4, Faculty of Law has been a leader in the field of legal education in India since its inception in 1924 and continues to be so till date. With the demand for increase in the number of students to be admitted in the Law Faculty, Law Centre- I was established in 1970, Law Centre-II in 1971, and Campus Law Centre in That the Petitioner was shocked to read a News item on in Indian Express news paper that the Respondent No.2, has imposed a condition this year that the Respondent No. 4, Law Faculty cannot admit more than 1,440 students in all its three centres though in all previous years the Law Faculty had been admitting 2310 students. A copy of the news downloaded from internet is annexed as ANNEXURE P-2.

5 11. That as per information available on the Website of Respondent No.3 has invited applications from eligible candidates to fill 126 vacant positions in Respondent No.4, Law faculty, a copy of information available on website is annexed as ANNEXURE P That the Respondent No.2 may impose condition to decrease strength of each law center of Respondent No.4 by invoking provisions contained in clause 5A of Schedule III of the Legal Education Rules,2008, a copy of Legal Education Rules,2008 is annexed as ANNEXURE P-4. The clause 5 A reads as under:- 5A. Size of a section : The Inspection Committee may approve for admission in each of the section of a class for not more than 60 students and may allow a minimum of two sections in each class but not more than five sections in one class (such as First Year or Second Year or Third Year, etc) as the case may be unless there is any exceptional reason for granting more sections in a Class, such a reason has to be specified by the inspection Committee That the provisions of clause 5 A of Schedule III of the Legal Education Rules,2008, herein after refered to as the impugned clause, are wrongly applied in present case as the strength of permissible admissions in each centre of Law Faculty, University of Delhi was decided much prior to the enactment of the Legal Education Rules, The provisions of clause 5 A of Schedule III of the Legal Education Rules,2008 are infringing fundamental rights of citizens seeking admission in Respondent No.4, hence are assailed as unconstitutional in present petition. 14. That the Respondent No.3 and 4 are public funded educational institutions receiving grants from University Grants Commission and by reducing number of admissions the public money is not put on optimum use.the objective of establishing public funded educational institutions is to provide an opportunity for higher education to a large number of students. It is worthwhile to note

6 here that spread of Legal Education is need of the hour and is a pious duty of the State. 15. That a large number of student shall suffer if the number of permissible admissions in LL.B. course at the Respondent No. 4 are decreased and it will infringe their legal and Fundamental right to have higher education of their choice. 16. The funds provided to the Delhi University from the money collected from Tax payer, thus it is necessary that it is put to optimum use. The same infrastructure of Law Faculty had been catering 2310 students for more than four decades, then it is not understandable to decrease the number of admissions. 17. That as a large number of students aspire to attain their education from the Respondent No.3 and 4 and their right has been tried to be curtailed by decreasing number of admissions in the Respondent No. 4, the petitioner immediately on sent a representation to the Respondents, however till date they have not responded. 18. That the indulgence of this Hon ble Court is sought to issue appropriate writ, inter-alia, on the following grounds:- GROUNDS. A. Because the impugned Clause is ultra virus to the fundamental rights as enshrined in Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. B. Because the impugned Clause infringes citizen s Right to Education, it is humbly submitted that to attain higher education is part of Right to Life, thus the impugned Clause is violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the restriction placed by the impugned clause to admit only upto 300 students in a law College is totally unreasonable and violates Constitution of India. C. Because the Students/citizens have a fundamental right to have equal opportunity to achieve higher education and to study course of their choice and the restriction placed by the impugned clause

7 does not have any intelligible diffrentia, thus is totally unreasonable, discriminatory and arbitrary. D. Because the restriction placed by the impugned clause is neither in the nature of professional standardization nor in the nature of technical standardization, thus the same is un-constitutional and ultra virus. E. Because the impugned Clause is violating the parent Act i.e. the Advocates Act,1961. It is submitted that Section 7(h) and 7(i) of the Advocate Act 1961 mandates promotion of legal education and to lay down standards of such education and recognition of University. The relevant section 7(h) and 7(i) are reproduced as under: S-7 (h)- To promote legal education and to lay down standards of such education in consultation with the Universities in India, imparting such education and the State Bar Councils ; S- 7 (i) To recognize Universities whose degree in law shall be a qualification for enrolment as an advocate and for that purpose to visit and inspect Universities or cause the State Bar Councils to visit and inspect Universities in accordance with such directions as it may give in this behalf ; The aforesaid provisions seek promotion of Legal Education, thus by putting restriction to admit students upto permitted strength the objective to promote legal education defeats. It is pertinent to note here that none of the provisions of the enabling law Advocate Act 1961 provides such a limitation on the number of admissible students in a center of legal education. F. Because the impugned clause is beyond the scope of rule makinpower entrusted by the Advocates Act G. Because the impugned Clause infringes the Public Policy as well as Educational Policy, as these envisage education and equal opportunity at all age levels and at the pace suited to them, the same cannot be restricted by a rule making body to the detriment of

8 and without the backup/ express provision provided by the Statutory laws. The role of Bar Council of India is to ensure minimum infrastructural requirement which includes building infrastructure like number of class rooms, availability of teachers, library facilities etc., however the strength of admissible students must be exclusive domain of concerned institution. H. Because reducing number of admissible students from 2310 to 1440, the Respondents are infringing fundamental rights of students aspiring to attain admission in the Respondent No.4 to study LL.B. It is submitted action of reducing admissible students violates Right to life as enshrined under Article 21 of Constitution of India. The said action also defeats basic principles of the Constitution of India. I. Because reducing number of admissible students from 2310 to 1440 defeats the objective of establishing the Respondent No.3 and 4. J. Because reducing number of admissible students from 2310 to 1440 is arbitrary and discriminatory and amounts to wastage of public money. It is stated that the Respondent No.3 and 4 are public funded educational institutions receiving grants from University Grants Commission and by reducing number of admissions the public money is not put on optimum use.the objective of establishing public funded educational institutions is to provide an opportunity for higher education to a large number of students. It is worthwhile to note here that spread of Legal Education is need of the hour and is a pious duty of the State. K. Because by reducing number of admissible students from 2310 to 1440 in the Respondent No. 4, a large number of student shall suffer and it will infringe their legal and Fundamental right to have higher education of their choice. L. Because the funds provided to the Respondent No. 3 and 4 from the

9 money collected from Tax payer, thus it is necessary that it is put to optimum use. The same infrastructure of Respondent No. 4 had been catering 2310 students for more than four decades, then by reducing number of admissions the infrastructure shall be wasted. M. Because there are only a few institutions which offer 3 year LL.B. Course and among them the Respondent No. 4 is the best and more particularly this is only institute in Delhi providing 3 year LL.B. Course after graduation. The Respondent No. 2 has prohibited lateral entry in 5 year LL.B. course for students seeking admission in Law Course after their graduation, thus by reducing number of permissible admissions in the Respondent No. 4, the respondents are infringing students fundamental right. N. Because by reducing number of admissible students from 2310 to 1440 in the Respondent No. 4 will cause not only economic effect on the citizen but also has prevent them from attaining higher education. 19. That the Petitioner seeks liberty from your Lordships to add and /or delete and/or amend any of the grounds during the submissions before this Hon ble Court. 20. That the Petitioner has not filed any other Petition before this Hon ble Court and/or Hon ble Supreme Court of India seeking same or similar relief. 21. That this Hon ble Court has got the jurisdiction to entertain and decide the present petition as the impugned infringement has taken place within the jurisdiction of this Hon ble Court. PRAYER In the light of the facts and circumstances, it is, therefore, most humbly prayed that this Hon ble Court may be pleased to:

10 (i) (ii) (iii) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ/direction/order thereby Striking down Clause 5 A of Schedule- III of Rules of Legal Education 2008 as enacted by Bar Council of India being arbitrary, capricious and violative of fundamental rights. Directing Respondents to admit 2310 students in the Respondent No.4 and not to reduce number of admissible students. Any other relief which this Hon ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case may also be granted in favor of the Petitioner and against the Respondents. It is prayed accordingly. THROUGH New Delhi Date PETITIONER IN PERSON JOGINDER SUKHIJA R/o 174, IInd Floor, Avtar Enclave, Paschim Vihar New Delhi

11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WP( C ) NO (IN THE MATTER OF PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION) IN THE MATTER OF : JOGINDER KUMAR SUKHIJA..PETITIONER VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. RESPONDENTS INDEX Sn. Particulars Page No. 1. Notice of Motion 2. Urgent Application 3. Memo of Parties 4. List of Dates and Events. 5. Public Interest Litigation Under Article 226 of Constitution of India 1950 alongwith affidavit. 6. Annexure P-1(Colly): Copy of representation mailed on Annexure P-2: Copy of news 8. Application Under Order 39 rule 1 and 2 read with Section 151 CPC on behalf of the petitioner seeking ad-interim ex-parte stay order alongwith Affidavit. 9. Application under section 151 CPC for exemption from filing legible/typed copy of certain annexures alongwith affidavit. 10. Vakalatnama PETITIONER IN PERSON JOGINDER SUKHIJA R/o 174, IInd Floor, Avtar Enclave, Paschim Vihar New Delhi Delhi Dated:

12 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WP( C ) NO (IN THE MATTER OF PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION) IN THE MATTER OF : JOGINDER KUMAR SUKHIJA..PETITIONER VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. RESPONDENTS IN THE MATTER OF : MEMO OF PARTIES JOGINDER KUMAR SUKHIJA S/o Sh.Prabhu Dayal Sukhija R/o 174, IInd Floor, Avtar Enclave, Paschim Vihar New Delhi PETITIONER VERSUS 1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Shastri Bhavan, New Delhi. 2. Bar Council of India, Through its Chairman, 21, Rouse Avenue Institutional Area, Near Bal Bhawan, New Delhi ID: 5. University of Delhi

13 Through The Vice Chancellor Maurice Nagar,Delhi ID: 6. Faculty of Law, Through its Dean, University of Delhi, Maurice Nagar,Delhi ID: RESPONDENTS THROUGH PETITIONER IN PERSON JOGINDER SUKHIJA R/o 174, IInd Floor, Avtar Enclave, Paschim Vihar New Delhi Delhi Dated:

14 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WP( C ) NO (IN THE MATTER OF PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION) IN THE MATTER OF : JOGINDER KUMAR SUKHIJA..PETITIONER VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. RESPONDENTS NOTICE OF MOTION Sir, The enclosed petition in the aforesaid matter as being filed on behalf of the Petitioner and is likely to be listed on or any date, thereafter. Please take notice accordingly. THROUGH PETITIONER IN PERSON JOGINDER SUKHIJA R/o 174, IInd Floor, Avtar Enclave, Paschim Vihar New Delhi Delhi Dated:

15 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WP( C ) NO (IN THE MATTER OF PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION) IN THE MATTER OF : JOGINDER KUMAR SUKHIJA..PETITIONER VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. RESPONDENTS URGENT APPLICATION Kindly treat this accompanying petition as an urgent one in accordance with the High Court Rules and orders as the Petitioner is seeking amendment of the impugned policy. THROUGH PETITIONER IN PERSON JOGINDER SUKHIJA R/o 174, IInd Floor, Avtar Enclave, Paschim Vihar New Delhi Delhi Dated:

16 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WP( C ) NO (IN THE MATTER OF PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION) IN THE MATTER OF : JOGINDER KUMAR SUKHIJA..PETITIONER VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. RESPONDENTS APPLICATION UNDER ORDER 39 RULE 1 AND 2 READ WITH SECTION 151 CPC ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER SEEKING AD-INTERIM DIRECTION. MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH: 1. That the Petitioner has filed the accompanying Public Interest Litigation under Article 226 of Constitution of India. The contents of the same are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity and may be read with part and parcel of this application. 2. That the need of the hour is granting education to maximum students using the public money to enhance education amongst youth of the country. 3. That there exists prima-facie case in favour of the Petitioner as the same is in interest of public at large. 4. That the Public at large shall suffer irreparable loss and injury in case the interim order as prayed is not granted in its favour. PRAYER: It is, therefore humbly prayed that Your Lordships may kindly be pleased to

17 (A) Pass an ad-interim ex-parte order thereby directing Respondents to admit 2310 students in the Respondent No.4 and not to reduce number of admissible students; Or (B) Any other order as this Hon ble court deems fit It is prayed accordingly. THROUGH PETITIONER IN PERSON JOGINDER SUKHIJA R/o 174, IInd Floor, Avtar Enclave, Paschim Vihar New Delhi Delhi Dated: IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WP( C ) NO (IN THE MATTER OF PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION) IN THE MATTER OF :

18 JOGINDER KUMAR SUKHIJA UNION OF INDIA & ORS. VERSUS..PETITIONER RESPONDENTS APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 151 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING THE LEGIBLE/TYPED/CERTIFIED COPIES OF DOCUMENTS, ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER. MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH: - 1. That the Petitioner has filed the accompanying Public Interest Litigation under Article 226 of Constitution of India. The contents of the same are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity and may be read with part and parcel of this application. 2. That the petitioner also despite best effort has not been able to get legible copies of the some documents. 3. That in view of the same present application is being moved praying that the Hon ble Court may exempt the petitioner from filing the legible copies of certain documents. 4. That the present application is bonafide and may be allowed in the interest of justice. PRAYER: In the facts and circumstances submitted herein above, it is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon ble Court in the interest of justice may be pleased to: A. Petitioner may be exempted from filing the legible/typed/certified copies of certain documents.

19 B. Pass such other or further orders, as this Hon ble Court may deem fit and proper on the facts and circumstances of the present case in favour of the petitioner. It is prayed accordingly. THROUGH PETITIONER IN PERSON JOGINDER SUKHIJA R/o 174, IInd Floor, Avtar Enclave, Paschim Vihar New Delhi Delhi Dated: IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WP( C ) NO (IN THE MATTER OF PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION) IN THE MATTER OF : JOGINDER KUMAR SUKHIJA..PETITIONER VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. RESPONDENTS Affidavit I, Joginder Sukhija, s/o. Prabhu Dayal, age about years, R/o 174, IInd Floor, Avtar Enclave, Paschim Vihar, New Delhi , do hereby solemnly affirm and state as under:

20 1. That I am the Petitioner in the above state matter and being well conversant with the facts of the case is as such competent to depose and swear the present affidavit. 2. That I have gone through the contents of the accompanying Application and the contents of the same are correct to my knowledge and as per records, the same has been drafted by my counsel under my instruction. Deponent Verification: I, the above named deponent do hereby verify that the contents of the above affidavit are true to my knowledge and no part of it is false and nothing material has been kept concealed therefrom. Verified at New Delhi on this day of May Deponent IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WP( C ) NO (IN THE MATTER OF PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION) IN THE MATTER OF : JOGINDER KUMAR SUKHIJA..PETITIONER VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. RESPONDENTS Affidavit I, Joginder Sukhija, s/o. Prabhu Dayal, age about years, R/o 174, IInd Floor, Avtar Enclave, Paschim Vihar, New Delhi , do hereby solemnly affirm and state as under: 1. That I am the Petitioner in the above state matter and being well conversant with the facts of the case is as such competent to depose and swear the present affidavit. 2. That I have gone through the contents of the accompanying Application and the contents of the same are correct to my

21 knowledge and as per records, the same has been drafted by my counsel under my instruction. Deponent Verification: I, the above named deponent do hereby verify that the contents of the above affidavit are true to my knowledge and no part of it is false and nothing material has been kept concealed therefrom. Verified at New Delhi on this day of May Deponent

22 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WP( C ) NO (IN THE MATTER OF PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION) IN THE MATTER OF : JOGINDER KUMAR SUKHIJA..PETITIONER VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. RESPONDENTS Affidavit I, Joginder Sukhija, s/o. Prabhu Dayal, age about years, R/o 174, IInd Floor, Avtar Enclave, Paschim Vihar, New Delhi , do hereby solemnly affirm and state as under: 1. That I am the Petitioner in the above state matter and being well conversant with the facts of the case is as such competent to depose and swear the present affidavit. 2. That I have filed the present petition as Public Interest Litigation. 3. That I have gone through the High Court (public Interest Litigation) Rules, 2010 and do hereby affirm that the present Public Interest Litigation is in conformity thereof. 4. That the petitioner has no personal interest in the litigation and neither myself nor anybody who the petitioner is interested would in any manner benefit from the relief sought in the present petition save as the member of general public. The petition is not guided by self gain or gain of any person, institution, body or there is no motive other than of public interest in filing the present petition. 5. That I have done whatsoever enquiry/investigation which was in my power to do to collect all data/material which was relevant for this court to entertain the present petition. I further confirm that I have not concealed in the present petition any data/material/information which may have enabled this court to

23 form an opinion whether to entertain this petition or not and/or whether to grant any relief or not. 6. That the documents filed along with the petition are true copies of their originals. Deponent Verification: I, the above named deponent do hereby verify that the contents of the above affidavit are true to my knowledge and no part of it is false and nothing material has been kept concealed therefrom. Verified at New Delhi on this day of May Deponent LIST OF DATES AND EVENTS

24 1924 The Respondent no.4, Faculty of Law has been a leader in the field of legal education in India and continues to be so till date Law Centre-I was established with the demand for increase in the number of students to be admitted in the Law Faculty 1971 Law Centre-II 1975 Campus Law centre was established The Petitioner filed representations with the Respondents through s, however has not received any response from Respondents. The representation was mailed on

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL WRIT JURISDICTION I.A NO OF 2012 WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2012 ASSAM SANMILITA MAHASANGHA & ORS

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL WRIT JURISDICTION I.A NO OF 2012 WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2012 ASSAM SANMILITA MAHASANGHA & ORS IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL WRIT JURISDICTION I.A NO OF 2012 IN WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2012 IN THE MATTER OF: ASSAM SANMILITA MAHASANGHA & ORS PETITIONERS VERSUS UNION OF INDIA &

More information

Bar and Bench (

Bar and Bench ( 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI (ORIGINAL (C.) WRIT JURISDICTION) WRIT PETITION (C.) NO. OF 2017 [Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India] IN THE MATTER OF : A Public Interest

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD DISTRICT: AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO OF 2008 AND AND AND AND AND. In the matter between;

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD DISTRICT: AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO OF 2008 AND AND AND AND AND. In the matter between; IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD DISTRICT: AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14664 OF 2008 In the matter of a petition under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India; AND In the matter

More information

RESPONDENTS. Article 14 read with Article 19 (1) G. Article 246 read with entry 77 list 1, 7 th schedule.

RESPONDENTS. Article 14 read with Article 19 (1) G. Article 246 read with entry 77 list 1, 7 th schedule. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA (EXTRAORDINARY CIVIL JURISDICTION) CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. ------------OF 2010 IN THE MATTER OF : Fatehpal Singh Singh R/o Panchkula PETITIONER VERSUS 1. Union of

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO 960 OF 2018 (UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA) VERSES

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO 960 OF 2018 (UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA) VERSES IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO 960 OF 2018 (UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA) IN THE MATTER OF: ASHWINI KUMAR UPADHYAY PETITIONER VERSES

More information

In the High Court of Judicature at Madras

In the High Court of Judicature at Madras In the High Court of Judicature at Madras (Special Original Jurisdiction) W.P. No. of 2017 H. Navas Basha 24/21, Bharathidasan Street Nehru Nagar Velachery Chennai 600 042 vs 1. The Bar Council of India

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION I.A. OF 2004 IN WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 63 OF Sandeep Parekh and ors.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION I.A. OF 2004 IN WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 63 OF Sandeep Parekh and ors. 1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION I.A. OF 2004 IN WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 63 OF 2004. IN THE MATTER OF: Sandeep Parekh and ors. Petitioners Applicants VERSUS Union of India

More information

PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. 1. The petitioner is filing the present Writ Petition under Article 32 of the

PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. 1. The petitioner is filing the present Writ Petition under Article 32 of the PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA TO, HON BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA AND HIS COMPANION JUDGES OF THE HON BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA. The humble petition of the Petitioner above

More information

Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com) DISTRICT : KOLKATA IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE W.P. No. (W) of 2017 In the matter of :- An application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India ;

More information

Bar & Bench ( SYNOPSIS

Bar & Bench (  SYNOPSIS SYNOPSIS That the petitioner is approaching this Hon ble Court seeking a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, and thereby defer the implementation of Notification published in

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO: OF In the matter:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO: OF In the matter: IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD DISTRICT: AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO: OF 2018 In the matter: i) Article 226 and 14 of the Constitution of India. ii) The Advocates Act, 1961 iii) The

More information

Date and Event. 22/12/2008 The Information and Technology Act, 2000 was. 22/12/2008 The Information and Technology Act, 2000 was

Date and Event. 22/12/2008 The Information and Technology Act, 2000 was. 22/12/2008 The Information and Technology Act, 2000 was 3 Date and Event 22/12/2008 The Information and Technology Act, 2000 was amended by Information Technology (Amendment) Bill 2008 and was passed by the Lok Sabha. 22/12/2008 The Information and Technology

More information

2 4. RahulRaj Mall Notice to be served upon its Authorized Representative Notice to be served its Authorized Representative Dumas Road, Magdalla, Sura

2 4. RahulRaj Mall Notice to be served upon its Authorized Representative Notice to be served its Authorized Representative Dumas Road, Magdalla, Sura 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD DISTRICT: SURAT WRIT PETITION NO. OF 2018 (PIL) (EXTRA ORDINARY JURISDICTION) Ref: In the matter of Public Interest Litigation related to collection and levy

More information

Bar & Bench (

Bar & Bench ( IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) NO OF 2018 (WITH PRAYER FOR INTERIM RELIEF) (ARISING FROM THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND FINAL ORDER DATED 05.01.2018

More information

Bar & Bench (

Bar & Bench ( IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) 1 I.A. NO. OF 2018 IN WRIT PETITION (C) No. OF 2018 [UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA] BETWEEN: DR. G. PARAMESHWAR & ANR. PETITIONER(s)

More information

Draft of Public Interest Writ Petition Against Restrictions on Withdrawals from Bank Accounts

Draft of Public Interest Writ Petition Against Restrictions on Withdrawals from Bank Accounts Draft of Public Interest Writ Petition Against Restrictions on Withdrawals from Bank Accounts By Anil Chawla Law Associates LLP We are of the opinion that Government of India and Reserve Bank of India

More information

Bar and Bench (

Bar and Bench ( IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI (EXTRA ORDINARY ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NOOF 2018 IN THE MATTER OF A PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION: Centre for Accountability and Systemic Change

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRL.M.P. NO. OF 2017 IN SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL) 5777 OF 2017.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRL.M.P. NO. OF 2017 IN SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL) 5777 OF 2017. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRL.M.P. NO. OF 2017 IN SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL) 5777 OF 2017 IN THE MATTER OF: Shafin Jahan Petitioner Versus Asokan K.M. &Ors. Respondents

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO OF Association for Democratic Reforms Versus

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO OF Association for Democratic Reforms Versus 381 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 3632 OF 2014 IN THE MATTER OF: Association for Democratic Reforms Union of India & Anr. Versus Petitioner Respondents AFFIDAVIT IN

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESH HIGH COURT DIVISION ( SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION ) AND -VERSUS AND. Bhaban (3 rd Floor), 56, Agrabad C/A,

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESH HIGH COURT DIVISION ( SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION ) AND -VERSUS AND. Bhaban (3 rd Floor), 56, Agrabad C/A, IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESH HIGH COURT DIVISION ( SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION ) WRIT PETITION NO. 4891 OF 2014. IN THE MATTER OF: An application for extension of stay. AND IN THE MATTER OF: Clewiston

More information

MODEL FORM OF NOTICE, COMPLAINT, AFFIDAVIT AND REPLY MODEL FORM -1 NOTICE BEFORE FILING THE COMPLAINT

MODEL FORM OF NOTICE, COMPLAINT, AFFIDAVIT AND REPLY MODEL FORM -1 NOTICE BEFORE FILING THE COMPLAINT MODEL FORM OF NOTICE, COMPLAINT, AFFIDAVIT AND REPLY MODEL FORM -1 NOTICE BEFORE FILING THE COMPLAINT Name and address... (of the trader, dealer, firm, company, etc.)... (Complete address) IN RE: (Mention

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT DELHI EXTRAORDINARY CRIMINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL.) NO. OF 2019 IN THE MATTER OF: VERSUS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT DELHI EXTRAORDINARY CRIMINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL.) NO. OF 2019 IN THE MATTER OF: VERSUS IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT DELHI EXTRAORDINARY CRIMINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL.) NO. OF 2019 IN THE MATTER OF: RAJEEV KUMAR PETITIONER VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. RESPONDENT INDEX S.NO.

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI (EXTRAORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION) WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2017 IN THE MATTER OF: Miss. Urvashi Khanna.Petitioner Versus Union of India through Secretary,

More information

r&bench (

r&bench ( IN THE HON BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P (C) NO. OF 2018 IN THE MATTER OF: ABHIMANYU BISHNOI (Through Guardian) PETITIONER Versus ALL INDIA INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES & ORS RESPONDENTS INDEX

More information

Bar and Bench (

Bar and Bench ( IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION O.A. NO. OF 2018 IN CS (OS) 3457/2015 IN THE MATTER OF; ARVIND KEJRIWAL....APPELLANT VERSUS ARUN JAITLEY.. RESPONDENT INDEX

More information

under the Right to Information Act about action taken if any on the complaint/representations made by him to the Governor of Goa against Advocate

under the Right to Information Act about action taken if any on the complaint/representations made by him to the Governor of Goa against Advocate SYNOPSIS AND LIST OF DATES DATES DATES 29.11.2010 Respondent No.3 herein sought information under the Right to Information Act about action taken if any on the complaint/representations made by him to

More information

IN THE COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

IN THE COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY 1 IN THE COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY (APPELLATE SIDE) (Rule 4(c) OF THE BOMBAY HIGH COURT PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION RULES 2010) DISTRICT: MUMBAI PIL PETITION NO. OF 2016 In the matter of Articles 12,

More information

The petitioner in W.P.No.7724/2018 has assailed. Rule 5 of the Karnataka Selection of Candidates for. Admission to Government Seats in Professional

The petitioner in W.P.No.7724/2018 has assailed. Rule 5 of the Karnataka Selection of Candidates for. Admission to Government Seats in Professional 1 BVNJ: 22/02/2018 W.P.No.7724/2018 C/W. W.P. Nos.8182, 8184, 8204, 8206, 8207, 8507, 8508, 8509, 8556, 8569, 8571, 8573 & 8698 of 2018 The petitioner in W.P.No.7724/2018 has assailed Rule 5 of the Karnataka

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION TRANSFERRED CASE (CIVIL) NO(S). 11 OF Versus

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION TRANSFERRED CASE (CIVIL) NO(S). 11 OF Versus 1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION REPORTABLE TRANSFERRED CASE (CIVIL) NO(S). 11 OF 2017 LT. CDR. M. RAMESH...PETITIONER(S) Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) (WITH I.A.

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESH APPELLATE DIVISION (CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION) CIVIL PETITION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL NO OF 2010.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESH APPELLATE DIVISION (CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION) CIVIL PETITION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL NO OF 2010. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESH APPELLATE DIVISION (CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION) CIVIL PETITION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL NO. 2274 OF 2010. IN THE MATTER OF: An application for acceptance of additional grounds

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESH HIGH COURT DIVISION ( SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION )

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESH HIGH COURT DIVISION ( SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION ) IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESH HIGH COURT DIVISION ( SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION ) WRIT PETITION NO. OF 2015 IN THE MATTER OF : An application under Article 102 of Constitution of the People s Republic

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) OF 2015 WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 13 OF 2003

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) OF 2015 WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 13 OF 2003 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) OF 2015 IN WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 13 OF 2003 (Arising from the Order dated May 13, 2015 passed in Writ Petition (Civil)

More information

CERTIFICATE OF URGENCY

CERTIFICATE OF URGENCY REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE EMPLOYMENT AND LABOUR RELATIONS COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI MILIMANI LAW COURTS PETITION NO. OF 2018 ARTICLES 1, 2, 3, 4(2), 10, 12(1)(A), 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 27, 41(1), 47,

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS (Special Original Jurisdiction) W.P. No. of 2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS (Special Original Jurisdiction) W.P. No. of 2018 MEMORANDUM OF WRIT PETITION (Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS (Special Original Jurisdiction) W.P. No. of 2018 Revenue Bar Association New No. 115

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : RECRUITMENT MATTER. W.P.(C) No. 8347/2010. Date of Decision: Versus

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : RECRUITMENT MATTER. W.P.(C) No. 8347/2010. Date of Decision: Versus IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : RECRUITMENT MATTER W.P.(C) No. 8347/2010 Date of Decision: 10.02.2011 MRS. PRERNA Through Mr. Ashok Agarwal, Advocate with Mr. Raunak Jain, Advocate and

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL EXTRAORDINARY JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2019 (Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL EXTRAORDINARY JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2019 (Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India) IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL EXTRAORDINARY JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2019 (Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India) IN THE MATTER OF: YOUTH FOR EQUALITY & Anr., Petitioners

More information

Bar&Bench (

Bar&Bench ( IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND FOR THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH Between: W.P.(P.I.L)No. of 2017 Telangana State Panchayat Raj Civil Engineers Forum Govt. Reg.

More information

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (The High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh) Small Industries Development Bank of India ( SIDBI)

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (The High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh) Small Industries Development Bank of India ( SIDBI) Review Petition No. 73/2013 (Arising out of Misc. Case No. 705/2013 In FAO 6/2013) IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (The High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh) Small Industries Development

More information

PUBLISHED UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE ORISSA NOTIFICATION The 20 th April 2010

PUBLISHED UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE ORISSA NOTIFICATION The 20 th April 2010 PUBLISHED UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE ORISSA NOTIFICATION The 20 th April 2010 No.270-R- In exercise of powers conferred under Article 225 of the Constitution of India, and as per

More information

THE COMMERCIAL COURTS, COMMERCIAL DIVISION AND COMMERCIAL APPELLATE DIVISION OF HIGH COURTS (AMENDMENT) BILL, 2018

THE COMMERCIAL COURTS, COMMERCIAL DIVISION AND COMMERCIAL APPELLATE DIVISION OF HIGH COURTS (AMENDMENT) BILL, 2018 AS INTRODUCED IN LOK SABHA Bill No. 123 of 2018 5 THE COMMERCIAL COURTS, COMMERCIAL DIVISION AND COMMERCIAL APPELLATE DIVISION OF HIGH COURTS (AMENDMENT) BILL, 2018 A BILL to amend the Courts, Division

More information

In the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi. I.A. No. of 2013 In Civil Suit Number 2439/2012. The Chancellor, Master And Scholars Of The University

In the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi. I.A. No. of 2013 In Civil Suit Number 2439/2012. The Chancellor, Master And Scholars Of The University In the Matter of: In the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi I.A. No. of 2013 In Civil Suit Number 2439/2012 The Chancellor, Master And Scholars Of The University Of Oxford And Ors... Plaintiffs Versus Rameshwari

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 158 OF 2012 IN. CIVIL APPEAL NO.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 158 OF 2012 IN. CIVIL APPEAL NO. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 158 OF 2012 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO. 868 of 2003 In the matter of:- People for Better Treatment (PBT).Petitioner Vs.

More information

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Versus. 2. To be referred to the reporter or not? No

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Versus. 2. To be referred to the reporter or not? No *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 23 rd July, 2010. + W.P.(C) 11305/2009, CM No.10831/2009 (u/s 151 CPC for stay), CM No.9694/2010 (u/o1 Rule 10 of CPC for impleadment) & CM No.

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI (CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) Writ Petition (Civil) No... Of 2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI (CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) Writ Petition (Civil) No... Of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI (CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) Writ Petition (Civil) No.... Of 2013 A WRIT PETITION IN PUBLIC INTEREST UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA HIGHLIGHTING

More information

BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA

BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA INTRODUCTION BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA The Bar Council of India is a statutory body that regulates and represents the Indian bar. It was created by Parliament under the Advocates Act, 1961. It prescribes standards

More information

THE COMMERCIAL COURTS, COMMERCIAL DIVISION AND COMMERCIAL APPELLATE DIVISION OF HIGH COURTS (AMENDMENT) BILL, 2018

THE COMMERCIAL COURTS, COMMERCIAL DIVISION AND COMMERCIAL APPELLATE DIVISION OF HIGH COURTS (AMENDMENT) BILL, 2018 AS PASSED BY LOK SABHA ON 01.08.18 Bill No. 123-C of 18 THE COMMERCIAL COURTS, COMMERCIAL DIVISION AND COMMERCIAL APPELLATE DIVISION OF HIGH COURTS (AMENDMENT) BILL, 18 A BILL to amend the Commercial Courts,

More information

Prof. Krishnapada Dash & Ors. -Versus- The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. L. C. Bihani, Mr. N. C. Bihani. For the petitioner.

Prof. Krishnapada Dash & Ors. -Versus- The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. L. C. Bihani, Mr. N. C. Bihani. For the petitioner. 1 11th June, 2014 (Sm) W. P.26356 (W) of 2013 Prof. Krishnapada Dash & Ors. -Versus- The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. L. C. Bihani, Mr. N. C. Bihani. For the petitioner. Mr. Sadananda Ghanguly, Mr.

More information

HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI. KANUBHAI M PATEL HUF - Petitioner(s) Versus

HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI. KANUBHAI M PATEL HUF - Petitioner(s) Versus IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 5295 of 2010 WITH SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO.5296 OF 2010 AND SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO.5297 OF 2010 HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESH HIGH COURT DIVISION ( SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESH HIGH COURT DIVISION ( SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESH HIGH COURT DIVISION ( SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION ) WRIT PETITION NO. OF 2015 IN THE MATTER OF : An application under Article 102 of Constitution of the People s Republic

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESH HIGH COURT DIVISION (SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESH HIGH COURT DIVISION (SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESH HIGH COURT DIVISION (SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) WRIT PETITION NO. 2932 OF 2010 IN THE MATTER OF: An application for a direction to the Respondents to allow the Petitioner

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1199 of 2016 In SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1452 of 2016 With CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11072 of 2016 In LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1199

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS (Special Original Jurisdiction) Versus

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS (Special Original Jurisdiction) Versus IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS (Special Original Jurisdiction) W.P. No.1366 of 2018 E.Vijay Anand, S/o. Aranga Ellangovan, Advocate, No.5/3, Pranav Apartments, Seethammal Main Road, Alwarpet,

More information

HIGH COURT OF DELHI: NEW DELHI NOTIFICATION

HIGH COURT OF DELHI: NEW DELHI NOTIFICATION HIGH COURT OF DELHI: NEW DELHI NOTIFICATION No. 451fRuiesIDHC Dated: 25.11.2010 In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 7 of the Delhi High Court Act, 1996 (Act No.26 of 1966) and all other powers

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) 4619/2003. versus

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) 4619/2003. versus IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 9 th August, 2010 W.P.(C) 4619/2003 DR.JAIPAL & ANR. Through Mr.Arvind Gupta with Mr.Bipin Singhvi and Mr.Ankit Chaudhary, Advocates GOVT. OF N.C.T.

More information

I have had the benefit of perusing the judgment of my. esteemed learned brother, Hon ble Justice Shri S.B. Sinha,

I have had the benefit of perusing the judgment of my. esteemed learned brother, Hon ble Justice Shri S.B. Sinha, TELECOM DISPUTES SETTLEMENT & APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI DATED 18 th JULY, 2011 Petition No. 275 (C) of 2009 Reliance Communications Limited.. Petitioner Vs. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited..... Respondent

More information

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. versus. % Date of Decision: 9 th February, J U D G M E N T

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. versus. % Date of Decision: 9 th February, J U D G M E N T $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI #37 + W.P.(C) 9340/2015 D.K. BHANDARI Through... Petitioner Mr. Rakesh Malviya with Mr. Karanveer Choudhary and Mr. Saurabh, Advocates versus GOVT. OF NCT OF

More information

W.P. (C) No. 45 of 2013

W.P. (C) No. 45 of 2013 IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) A I Z A W L B E N C H :: A I Z A W L W.P. (C) No. 45 of 2013 Sh. J. Vanlalchhuanga, S/o Ralkapliana R/o Ramhlun,

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 298 of 2013 ------- Md. Rizwan Akhtar son of Late Md. Suleman, resident of Ahmad Lane, Azad Basti, Gumla, P.O, P.S. and District: Gumla... Petitioner

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI (CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) Writ Petition (Civil) No. 866 of COMMON CAUSE Vs UNION OF INDIA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI (CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) Writ Petition (Civil) No. 866 of COMMON CAUSE Vs UNION OF INDIA IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI (CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) Writ Petition (Civil) No. 866 of 2010 COMMON CAUSE Vs UNION OF INDIA PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION SYNOPSIS That the petitioner is filing

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD. SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO of 2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD. SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 19743 of 2015 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA ==========================================================

More information

ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA Nirvachan Sadan, Ashoka Road, New Delhi

ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA Nirvachan Sadan, Ashoka Road, New Delhi ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA Nirvachan Sadan, Ashoka Road, New Delhi 110 001. No. 3/ER/2003/JS-II Dated : 27 th March, 2003 O R D E R 1. Whereas, the superintendence, direction and control, inter alia,

More information

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Checklist for Appeals under Companies Act, 2013 & Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Checklist for Appeals under Companies Act, 2013 & Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Checklist for Appeals under Companies Act, 2013 & Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 Appeals to be in Form NCLAT-1 (in triplicate) along with an affidavit in Form

More information

Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com) REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3945 OF 2018 (ARISING OUT OF SLP (C) NO.35786 OF 2016) SISTERS OF ST. JOSEPH OF CLUNY APPELLANT VERSUS THE STATE OF

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : THE ARCHITECTS ACT, 1972 Date of decision: 4th January, 2012 WP(C) NO.8653/2008

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : THE ARCHITECTS ACT, 1972 Date of decision: 4th January, 2012 WP(C) NO.8653/2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : THE ARCHITECTS ACT, 1972 Date of decision: 4th January, 2012 WP(C) NO.8653/2008 INSTITUTE OF TOWN PLANNERS, INDIA... Petitioner Through: Mr. Rakesh Kumar

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESH HIGH COURT DIVISION (SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESH HIGH COURT DIVISION (SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESH HIGH COURT DIVISION (SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) WRIT PETITION NO. OF 2015. IN THE MATTER OF: An application under Article 102 of the Constitution of the People s

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI COMPANY JURISDICTION. CCP (Co.) No. 8 of 2008 COMPANY PETITION NO. 215 OF 2005

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI COMPANY JURISDICTION. CCP (Co.) No. 8 of 2008 COMPANY PETITION NO. 215 OF 2005 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI COMPANY JURISDICTION CCP (Co.) No. 8 of 2008 IN COMPANY PETITION NO. 215 OF 2005 Reserved on: 26-11-2010 Date of pronouncement : 18-01-2011 M/s Sanjay Cold Storage..Petitioner

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 55/2019 VS. COUNTER AFFIDAVIT ON BEHALF OF UNION OF INDIA

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 55/2019 VS. COUNTER AFFIDAVIT ON BEHALF OF UNION OF INDIA IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 55/2019 IN THE MATTER OF: JANHIT ABHIYAN PETITIONER VS. UNION OF INDIA RESPONDENT COUNTER AFFIDAVIT ON BEHALF OF UNION

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : COMPANIES ACT W.P.(C) No.1098 of 2012 Reserved on: February 24, Pronounced on: April 20, 2012

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : COMPANIES ACT W.P.(C) No.1098 of 2012 Reserved on: February 24, Pronounced on: April 20, 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : COMPANIES ACT W.P.(C) No.1098 of 2012 Reserved on: February 24, 2012 Pronounced on: April 20, 2012 NIVEDITA SHARMA Through: VERSUS Petitioner-in-person....

More information

Bar and Bench (

Bar and Bench ( IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI EXTRA ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2018 IN THE MATTER OF:- KTC (India) Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central GST Audit-II

More information

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Judgment delivered on: 4 th August, I.A. No.16571/2012 & I.A. No.16572/2012 in CS (OS) 2527/2009

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Judgment delivered on: 4 th August, I.A. No.16571/2012 & I.A. No.16572/2012 in CS (OS) 2527/2009 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 4 th August, 2015 + I.A. No.16571/2012 & I.A. No.16572/2012 in CS (OS) 2527/2009 VEENA KUMARI Through... Plaintiff Mr.D.S. Vohra, Adv.

More information

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI UTV SOFTWARE COMMUNICATIONS. versus. Through None CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI UTV SOFTWARE COMMUNICATIONS. versus. Through None CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI #14 + CS(COMM) 799/2018 UTV SOFTWARE COMMUNICATIONS LTD. & ORS... Plaintiffs Through Mr. Saikrishna Rajagopal with Mr. Sidharth Chopra, Ms. Suhasini Raina,

More information

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR. W.P. No.750/2017. Bar Association Lahar, Dist. Bhind -Versus- State Bar Council of M.

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR. W.P. No.750/2017. Bar Association Lahar, Dist. Bhind -Versus- State Bar Council of M. HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR W.P. No.750/2017 Bar Association Lahar, Dist. Bhind -Versus- State Bar Council of M.P and another Shri Sameer Seth, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri R.K. Sahu,

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) I.A. NO. OF 2018 IN WRIT PETITION (C) No. 536 OF 2018

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) I.A. NO. OF 2018 IN WRIT PETITION (C) No. 536 OF 2018 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) 1 I.A. NO. OF 2018 IN WRIT PETITION (C) No. 536 OF 2018 [UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA] BETWEEN: DR. G. PARAMESHWAR & ANR. UNION

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Special Appeal No. 478 of 2018 Paresh Tripathi Versus Ganesh Prasad Badola and others...appellant. Respondents. Present: Mr. C.K. Sharma, Advocate for the appellant.

More information

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH: JABALPUR. For M.P. H.J.S. (District Judge-Entry Level) through Promotion from Civil Judges Senior Division Exam-2017

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH: JABALPUR. For M.P. H.J.S. (District Judge-Entry Level) through Promotion from Civil Judges Senior Division Exam-2017 Page 1 of 6 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH: JABALPUR A D V E R T I S E M E N T For M.P. H.J.S. (District Judge-Entry Level) through Promotion from Civil Judges Senior Division Exam-2017 (Under Recent Proviso

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESH HIGH COURT DIVISION ( SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESH HIGH COURT DIVISION ( SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESH HIGH COURT DIVISION ( SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION ) WRIT PETITION NO. OF 2014 IN THE MATTER OF : An application under Article 102 of Constitution of the People s Republic

More information

...Petitioner. Versus PAPER BOOK. Of 2015:- Application for permission to file SLP. of 2015:- Application for exemption from.

...Petitioner. Versus PAPER BOOK. Of 2015:- Application for permission to file SLP. of 2015:- Application for exemption from. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA [S.C.R., Order XXII Rule 2(1)] CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO. OF 2015 UNDER ARTICLE 136 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA (Arising from the impugned

More information

Nominations called for the post of Judicial Member, Appellate Tribunal for Electricity

Nominations called for the post of Judicial Member, Appellate Tribunal for Electricity Nominations called for the post of Judicial Member, Appellate Tribunal for Electricity The Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (ATE) has been set up at New Delhi by the Government of India under the provisions

More information

FLAG PRIMER ON THE WRIT OF AMPARO

FLAG PRIMER ON THE WRIT OF AMPARO 1. Origin of the remedy: FLAG PRIMER ON THE WRIT OF AMPARO The writ of amparo (which means protection ) is of Mexican origin. Its present form is found in Articles 103 and 107 of the Mexican Constitution.

More information

In the High Court of Judicature at Madras. (Special Original Jurisdiction) W.P. No of 2014

In the High Court of Judicature at Madras. (Special Original Jurisdiction) W.P. No of 2014 In the High Court of Judicature at Madras (Special Original Jurisdiction) W.P. No. 18639 of 2014 Dr. S.P. Udayakumar 27, Isanganvilai Mani Veethi Parakkai Road Junction Nagerkovil 629 002.. Petitioner

More information

J U D G M E N T. 2. These two appeals have been filed against. the identically worded judgments of High Court. of Madhya Pradesh dated

J U D G M E N T. 2. These two appeals have been filed against. the identically worded judgments of High Court. of Madhya Pradesh dated 1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.871 OF 2018 arising out of SLP (C)No. 26528 of 2013 THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS....APPELLANT(S) VERSUS MANOJ

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. I.A. No.1167/2007 in CS(OS) No.2128/2006. Judgment Reserved on:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. I.A. No.1167/2007 in CS(OS) No.2128/2006. Judgment Reserved on: IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE I.A. No.1167/2007 in CS(OS) No.2128/2006 Judgment Reserved on: 24.07.2007 Judgment delivered on: 04.03.2008 Mr. V.K. Sayal Through:

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO OF Society Ltd (IPRS)..Petitioner Vs.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO OF Society Ltd (IPRS)..Petitioner Vs. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION The Indian Performing Right WRIT PETITION NO. 2384 OF 2014 Society Ltd (IPRS)..Petitioner Vs. Union of India and Others WITH

More information

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 7 th January, W.P.(C) 5472/2014, CM Nos /2014, 12873/2015, 16579/2015

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 7 th January, W.P.(C) 5472/2014, CM Nos /2014, 12873/2015, 16579/2015 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 7 th January, 2016 + W.P.(C) 5472/2014, CM Nos. 10868-69/2014, 12873/2015, 16579/2015 ASHFAQUE ANSARI... Petitioner Through: Mr. V. Shekhar,

More information

LAW AREA NAME : WOMAN SECTION NAME : SPECIAL LAWS SUB SECTION NAME : DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT LAW IN BRIEF

LAW AREA NAME : WOMAN SECTION NAME : SPECIAL LAWS SUB SECTION NAME : DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT LAW IN BRIEF LAW AREA NAME : WOMAN SECTION NAME : SPECIAL LAWS SUB SECTION NAME : DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT LAW IN BRIEF Giving and taking dowry are both offences under the Dowry Prohibition Act. Demanding dowry or advertising

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. W.P.(C) No.3245/2002 and CM No.11982/06, 761/07. Date of Decision: 6th August, 2008.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. W.P.(C) No.3245/2002 and CM No.11982/06, 761/07. Date of Decision: 6th August, 2008. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : Railways Act, 1989 W.P.(C) No.3245/2002 and CM No.11982/06, 761/07 Date of Decision: 6th August, 2008 M.K. SHARMA.. Petitioner Through : Mr. K.N. Kataria,

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : APPOINTMENT MATTER Date of decision: 11th July, 2012 W.P.(C) No.1343/1998.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : APPOINTMENT MATTER Date of decision: 11th July, 2012 W.P.(C) No.1343/1998. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : APPOINTMENT MATTER Date of decision: 11th July, 2012 W.P.(C) No.1343/1998 SRI GURU TEGH BAHADUR KHALSA POST GRADUATE EVENING COLLEGE Through: None....

More information

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI (PRINCIPAL BENCH)

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI (PRINCIPAL BENCH) BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI (PRINCIPAL BENCH) Application No. 30 of 2011 Wednesday, the 14 th day of December, 2011 QUORUM: 1. Hon ble Justice Shri C.V. Ramulu (Judicial Member) 2. Hon

More information

108 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CWP No.9382 of 2015

108 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CWP No.9382 of 2015 CWP No.9382 of 2015-1- 108 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.9382 of 2015 Mr. Harpreet Singh and ohters Vs. The Council of Architecture and others Present:- Mr. Anil Malhotra,

More information

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + ARB.A. 5/2015 & IA 2340/2015 (for stay) versus

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + ARB.A. 5/2015 & IA 2340/2015 (for stay) versus * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ARB.A. 5/2015 & IA 2340/2015 (for stay) Judgment reserved on February 05, 2015 Judgment delivered on February 13, 2015 M/S VARUN INDUSTRIES LTD & ORS... Appellants

More information

% W.P.(C) No. 5513/2004

% W.P.(C) No. 5513/2004 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Judgment delivered on: November 27, 2015 % W.P.(C) No. 5513/2004 M/S MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI... Petitioner Through: Ms. Saroj Bidawat, Advocate. versus

More information

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 7262/2014

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 7262/2014 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 7262/2014 Pronounced on: 03.02.2015 PRINCE KUMAR & ORS.... Appellant Through: Mr.Anil Sapra, Sr.Adv. with Mr.Tarun Kumar Tiwari, Mr.Mukesh Sukhija, Ms.Rupali

More information

Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi

Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi Rajeev Kumar Manglik vs The Director General Of Works on 26 May, 2014 Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi O.A.No.1599/2013 MA 1216/2013 Order

More information

THE INDIAN JURIST

THE INDIAN JURIST ITEM NO.12 COURT NO.1 SECTION XVI 1 S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.34251/2017 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : CORAM

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : CORAM IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 05.02.2018 CORAM The HON'BLE MS.INDIRA BANERJEE, CHIEF JUSTICE AND The HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE W.P.No.2041 of 2018 and WMP.Nos.2553 & 2554 of

More information

THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Judgment delivered on: M/S MITSUBISHI CORPORATION INDIA P. LTD Petitioner.

THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Judgment delivered on: M/S MITSUBISHI CORPORATION INDIA P. LTD Petitioner. THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 30.07.2010 + WP (C) 11932/2009 M/S MITSUBISHI CORPORATION INDIA P. LTD Petitioner - versus THE VALUE ADDED TAX OFFICER & ANR... Respondent

More information

Bar & Bench (

Bar & Bench ( CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM -II UDYOG SADAN C C 22 23 QUTUB INSTITUTIONNAL AREA BEHIND QUTUB HOTEL NEW DELHI 110016 Complaint Case No. CC/230/2011 ( Date of Filing : 15 Jul 2011 ) 1. KHUSHAL KOLWAR

More information

Special Appeal No. 390 of 2018

Special Appeal No. 390 of 2018 Reserved IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Special Appeal No. 390 of 2018 Paresh Tripathi Appellant Versus Mahesh Chandra Sharma and others. Respondents Mr. C.K. Sharma, Advocate for the appellant.

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO. OF 2017 IN Writ Petition (Civil) No.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO. OF 2017 IN Writ Petition (Civil) No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO. OF 2017 IN Writ Petition (Civil) No. 131/2013 AND IN THE MATTER OF: ASSOCIATION FOR DEMOCRATIC REFORMS AND ANR. PETITIONER

More information

ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, LUCKNOW COURT NO 2. OA 274/2014 with MA 1802/2014. Thursday, this the 16th of Feb 2015

ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, LUCKNOW COURT NO 2. OA 274/2014 with MA 1802/2014. Thursday, this the 16th of Feb 2015 1 RESERVED ORDER A.F.R ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, LUCKNOW COURT NO 2 OA 274/2014 with MA 1802/2014 Thursday, this the 16th of Feb 2015 Hon ble Mr. Justice Virendra Kumar DIXIT, Judicial Member

More information