IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI ---- W.P.(C)

Save this PDF as:
 WORD  PNG  TXT  JPG

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI ---- W.P.(C)"

Transcription

1 1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI ---- W.P.(C) No of M/s Tata Steel Limited, an existing Company under previous Company Law, through Mrs. MeenaLall wife of Shri BehariLall, working as Chief-Legal & Compliance, having registered office at 24, Homi Modi Street, P.O. Fort, Police Station Fort, Town & District Mumbai, Maharashtra and having its Steel Plant and Office at Jamshedpur, P.O. and PS Bistupur, Town Jamshedpur, District East Singhbhum Petitioner 1.Union of India through Secretary, Ministry of Mines, Shastri Bhawan, PO and PS Parliament Street, New Delhi (NCT of Delhi) 2.The State of Jharkhand through its Secretary, Department of Mines & Geology, Nepal House, PO and PS Doranda, Ranchi, 3.Deputy Commissioner, having its office at Chaibasa, PO and PS Chaibasa, District West Singhbhum, 4.Joint Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Nepal House, PO and PS Doranda, District Ranchi, 5.The District Mining Officer, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa, PO and PS Chaibasa, District West Singhbhum, 6.The Assistant Mining Officer, West Singhbhum, at Chaibasa, PO and PS Chaibasa, District West Singhbhum Respondents With W.P.(C) No.3976 of Orissa Manganese and Minerals Limited, a Company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, having its registered Office at 3rd Floor, Annexe building, IPICOL House, Janapath, PO Bhoi Nagar, Police Station Shaheed Nagar, Bhubaneswar , District Khurda (Odisha), represented through its Executive Director, Sri Amritanshu Prasad, Son of Late Durga Prasad, resident of 183/C, Ashok Nagar, PO and PS Argora Town and District Ranchi....Petitioner -Versus- -Versus- 1.The State of Jharkhand through its Chief Secretary, having office at Jharkhand Mantralaya, Project Bhawan, HEC Township, Dhurwa, PO and PS Dhurwa, District Ranchi. 2.The Secretary, Department of Mines & Geology Government of Jharkhand, having Office at Nepal House, Doranda, PO and PS Doranda, District Ranchi, 3.The Deputy Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, Government of Jharkhand, having office at Nepal House, Doranda, PO and PS Doranda, District Ranchi, 4.The District Mining Officer, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa, PO and PS Chaibasa, District West Singhbhum...Respondents.

2 CORAM: HON BLE MR. JUSTICE VIRENDER SINGH, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.P. BHATT For the Petitioner : M/s Dr. A.M. Singhvi, Senior Advocate, Indrajit Sinha, Nandini Gore, Amit Bhandari, Devina Sehgal,Ganesh Pathak & Khusboo Bari, Advocates For the Respondents : M/s Ajit Kumar Sinha, Senior Advocate; Jai Prakash, AAG & Rishi Pallava, JC to AAG Amit Paswan, Advocate / Dated: 17 th September, 2015 Per Virender Singh, C.J.: 1. Challenge in these writ petitions are the various letters demanding penalty alleging illegal mining by the petitioners. Prayer has been for quashing the order as contained in letter No.1613/M Ranchi dated issued by Respondent No.4, for quashing paragraphs 1, 3 and 5 of the order as contained in letter No.286/M Ranchi dated issued by Respondent No.4 and for quashing the order as contained in letter No.891/M dated issued by Respondent No.5. Further prayer has been made commanding upon the respondent no. 2 and 3 to execute Supplementary Lease Deed for extension of period of mining lease and also for a direction upon the respondent no. 5 to issue the forwarding notes/challans for dispatch of iron ore to the petitioner s steel plant at Jamshedpur. 2. Service upon respondents is complete. 3. These cases have come before this Court for grant of interim relief only. 4. For better appreciation of the case, we are going into the facts of W.P.C No of 2015, for the reason that in another writ petition being W.P. (C) No.396 of 2015, virtually the issue is same. 5. The petitioner-company (hereinafter to be referred to as 'petitioner') is a mining lessee for Iron Ore in Noamundi, Dist. of West Singhbhum since and subsequently the lease was renewed twice for the period of thirty years each with effect from and Before the expiry of second renewal, the petitioner applied for third renewal and continued its mining operation during the pending of its application. The petitioner was granted Temporary Work Permission by the Ministry of Environment & Forest for the period of one year w.e.f and the same was extended by the Hon ble Supreme Court on for three months and again on for another three

3 3. months. In the meantime, on the Hon ble Supreme Court in Goa Foundation Vs. Union of India reported in (2014) 6 SCC 590 held that the opinion of the State Government in terms of the section 8(3) of Mines & Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957 (hereinafter to be referred as 'MMDR Act') is sine qua non for carrying out mining operations under Rule 24A(6) of Mineral Concession Rules,1960 (hereinafter to be referred to as the 'MCR Rules') for the period prior to the execution of renewed mining lease in the case of second and subsequent renewal. Thereafter the Central Government amended Rule 24A(6) in MCR, 1960 and the provision of deemed renewal is deleted. The petitioner discontinued its mining operation on and sought formal orders under erstwhile section 8(3) of the MMDR Act and when the order was not made a writ being W.P.C No of 2014 was filed and by judgment dt the State Government was directed to issue express orders under erstwhile 8(3) of the MMDR Act. In compliance of the order dt the State Government passed an order under section 8(3) of MMDR Act on but reduced the area from hec. to hec. by deducting the forest land and further demanded penalty of Rs Crores towards alleged mining. The petitioner challenged the demand of penalty by filing a writ being W.P.C No of 2014 which is pending in this court. After grant of the express order the petitioner made payment of Rs.152 Crore to the State Govt. under protest and resumed its mining operation on The Central Government, in the meantime, made an amendment in MMDR Act, 1957 by Amendment Act, 2015 and Section 8A(5) was introduced to the MMDR Act w.e.f The State Government by order dt modified the earlier order dt and extended the period of mining lease upto with respect to the reduced area subject to the payment of demand earlier raised vide order dt The petitioner, thereafter, repeatedly requested for renewal of its mining lease but the State raised demand of Rs Crore and stopped from issuing forwarding note for dispatch of iron ore to its Steel Plant. Thereafter the petitioner made payment of Rs.50 Crores under protest on in anticipation of receiving forwarding notes in the meantime the Supplementary Lease Deed was executed. The State Government by impugned communication dt amended the sanction order dt and deleted paras 2, 3, 4 and 5 which included confirmation of extension of mining lease of the petitioner upto On the petitioner again requested to issue forwarding notes but it received a letter bearing no. 891/M dt whereby the petitioner was directed to make

4 4. payment of Rs crores and to obtain Mining Dues Clearance Certificate. Hence the writ petition. 6. The second writ petition being W.P.(C) No.3976 of 2015 also includes the same issue. 7. Heard M/s Dr. A.M Singhvi, Senior Advocate, Gopal Jain, Sr. Advocate assisted by Indrajit Sinha, Nandini Gore, Amit Bhandari, Devina Sehgal, Khushboo Bari and Ganesh Pathak, advocates on behalf of the petitioners and M/s Ajit Kumar Sinha, Senior Advocate, Jai Prakash, AAG, Amit Paswan, Advocate & Rishi Pallava, JC to AAG. 8. Dr. Singhvi submitted that the petitioner has prima facie a very good case on merits as in view of the insertion of Section 8A(5) in the MMDR Act the State Government is under an obligation to grant an extension of lease deed w.e.f the date of expiry of its last renewal of the lease to , in turn it is an automatic extension or can be said to be auto renewal without any hindrance, as such there is no question of any demand of penalty for illegal mining as alleged by the State Government. Dr. Singhvi contended that the State Government has granted the order under the erstwhile Section 8(3) of MMDR Act to the petitioner on , however over the reduced area of hectare against the applied renewal area of hectare by deducting such forest land for which the forest clearance was not obtained and imposed certain extraneous terms and conditions upon the petitioner including the demand of Rs crore towards penalty for alleged illegal mining and that the petitioner challenged the said conditions of order dated passed by the State Government vide W.P.(C) No.6459 of 2014 which is pending before this Court and tagged with L.P.A. No.547 of 2014 arising from the order dated passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No.5225 of 2014 whereby State Government was directed to issue express order under erstwhile Section 8(3) of MMDR Act. 9. Learned Senior Counsel submitted that the petitioner resumed mining operations on after the grant of express order dated and upon payment of an amount of Rs.152 crore to the State Government, however, under protest without prejudice to the rights of the petitioner under law and it is thereafter a request was made for release of forwarding notes/challans for the dispatch of iron ore to the petitioner s steel plant. Learned Senior Counsel submitted that with regard to the amount now shown to be due from the petitioner is from , the day of pronouncement of Goa Foundation Case (Supra) up to which, according to the State, turns out to be Rs crore and that out of this

5 5. amount also, petitioner has paid Rs.50 crore. He contended that the forwarding notes/challans for dispatch of the iron ores already issued are valid till and the State respondent is now using pressure tactics upon the petitioner for the reason that if the forwarding notes/challans are not given to the petitioner, its mining activities will come to a grinding halt and the number of persons employed in the mining operation will be on roads, thereby the petitioner will suffer irreparable loss and injury. Learned Senior Counsel submitted that the State has now put certain ultra vires conditions in granting mining lease and is trying to do something indirectly which is not allowed to do directly as in law mining is not stopped but otherwise stopped. Learned Senior Counsel submitted that review of the earlier order dated in the impugned order dated without any opportunity of hearing is prejudicial to the petitioner. He submitted that balance of convenience also tilts in favour of the petitioner. 10. Learned Senior Counsel lastly submitted that the State is having royalty to the tune of more than Rs.30 crore every month from the petitioner, despite that, it is bent upon to harass the petitioner whereas the petitioner has been able to make out prima facie a case favouring him for the interim relief of stay of the operation of the letter/order dated (Annexure-29 available on paper book). 11. Mr. Ajit Kumar Sinha, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the State tried to justify the demand of penalty as alleged stating that in view of the judgment passed in Goa Foundation Case (Supra) any mining activity carried out by lessee after expiry of the lease was illegal even if application has been made for renewal and the same not decided. Learned Senior Counsel submitted that by virtue of Section 10A(2) of MMDR (Amendment) Act, 2015, the State has to grant the mining lease to the lessee but the lessee is obliged to fulfill certain conditions imposed by the State and in this case also certain conditions were imposed and that the petitioner also agreed to it. Learned Senior Counsel submitted that it is a case in which more than 3500 crores is due from the petitioner but the recovery of the amount from the date of expiry of the first renewal up to , the day of pronouncement of judgment of Goa Foundation Case (Supra), is not being made as the said issue is pending adjudication in this Court in L.P.A. No. 547 of 2014 and analogous cases tagged with the said appeal and all the cases now posted for for final consideration, therefore, any expression of opinion now at this stage would certainly have its effect upon other cases yet to be decided. Mr. Sinha submitted that the State had been rather very fair with the petitioner in not

6 6. raising the said demand and has now confined its demand only from the period to for which also liberty was given to the petitioner to clear the dues in three equal monthly installments. Learned Senior Counsel submitted that the order dated now sought to be quashed is virtually a consent order and the petitioner cannot back out from the same and submitted that on this ground alone, the petition being W.P.(C) No.3768 of 2015 deserves to be dismissed. 12. Learned Senior Counsel further submitted that the effect of Section 8A(5) would be that the leases in question which had lapsed since long would have to to auctioned and there is no provision of renewal of lapsed lease in MMDR (Amendment) Act, 2015 and that the only distinguishing feature which favours the petitioner is that on the application for renewal made by the petitioner, the decision now taken on the said application is before coming into force of the Amendment Act of 2015, otherwise the petitioner had no legs to stand at all. He thus submitted that the petitioner, in any case, has no ground much less valid on legal ground asking for the stay of the operation of impugned letter dated Similarly, petitioner in W.P.(C) No.3976 of 2015 has also no case for any interim relief. 13. At the cost of repetition, admittedly, the petitioner had applied for the renewal of its mining lease before expiry and continued its operation on the ground of deemed renewal in terms of Rule 24A(6) of the MCR, The first change in the situation was made after the decision of Goa Foundation (Supra.) wherein the Hon ble Supreme Court held that the opinion of the State Government is sine qua non for carrying out mining operation. Thereafter, Rule 24A(6) was amended and the mining operation was discontinued on The petitioner was granted the third renewal on dt , subject to the condition that the petitioner will have to produce clearance certificate after payment of penalty of Rs Crores. The petitioner resumed its mining operation on after payment of Rs.152 Crore under protest. The second change in the situation was made after Amendment in MMDR Act by which section 8A(5) was introduced. Thereafter, the Government by letter dt made an amendment in the earlier letter dt and provided the manner in which the payment shall be made. It is stated in the letter that payment of penalty from to shall be made immediately, payment from to shall be made in three monthly installments and payment from to shall be subject to the interim order passed by the Hon ble Court. 14. From the facts it appears that the State has divided the payment of

7 7. penalty into three parts, first is from to which is the subject matter in the pending matters before this Court, the second part is from to for an amount of Rs.152 Crores and the third part is from to for which total of Rs crore was demanded. The payment of Rs.152 Crores made by the petitioner was adjusted to the dues from to The present case is the subject matter of third part i.e from to , the period from the judgment of Goa Foundation (Supra.) to amendment of Rule 24A(6) of MCR, 1960 by which the provision of deemed renewal was deleted from the cases of second and subsequent mining leases. Out of the dues of third part the petitioner has paid Rs.50 Crores and now, as per State Rs crores is still due. 15. It is a settled proposition of law that the court should be slow while granting stay in the revenue matter and the stay cannot be granted unless the party praying for stay has a very strong case vis-à-vis the case of the other party. It is also equally well settled that before granting stay the court must apply its mind to the facts of the case and must also envisage the implications and consequences of the order it proposes to make. 16. From the facts as aforesaid it appears that the following two provisions as has been laid down in MMDR Amendment Act, 2015 are relevant. Section 8A(5) reads as follows:- Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (2), (3) and sub-section (4), the period of lease granted before the date of commencement of the Mines & Minerals (Development & Regulation) Amendment Act, 2015 where mineral is used for captive purpose, shall be extended and be deemed to have been extended up to a period ending 31 st March 2030 w.e.f the date of expiry of the period of renewal last made or till completion of the renewal period, if any, or a period of fifty years from the grant of such lease, whichever is later, subject to the condition that all the terms and conditions of the lease have been complied with. Section 10A(2)(c) reads as follows:- (c) where the Central Government has communicated previous approval as required under sub-section (1) of section 5 for grant of a mining lease, or if a letter of intent (by whatever name called) has been issued by the State Government to grant a mining lease, before the commencement of the Mines and Mineral Development and Regulation) Amendment, 2015, the mining lease shall be granted subject to fulfillment of the conditions of the previous approval or of letter of intent within a period of two years from the date of commencement of the said Act. Provided that in the respect of any mineral specified in the First Schedule, no prospecting licence or mining lease shall be granted under clause (b) of this sub-section except with the previous

8 8. approval of the Central Government. 17. Now coming back to the case in hand, the application for third renewal of the mining lease had already been considered before the Amendment Act, 2015 and the same was granted subject to some conditions stipulated therein. The petitioner had also acted upon the said condition by depositing Rs.152 crores and had taken the benefit of the renewal by resuming its mining operation. As such the claim of the petitioner that after the amendment of section 8A(5) of the Amendment Act, 2015 the lease of the petitioner has been renewed by the operation of law and as such it is not liable to make any payment for the illegal mining, cannot be sustained, prima facie, for the reason that once the application for renewal had been acted upon prior to Amendment Act, 2015 then unless and until the condition precedent for renewal of the lease is fulfilled, the benefit of section 8A(5) i.e renewal of lease up to 31st March 2030 cannot be extended to the petitioner. In section 8A(5) itself it is specifically mentioned subject to the condition that all the terms and conditions of the lease must be complied with. 18. The aforesaid view also finds support from section 10A(c) of the MMDR Amendment Act, 2015 wherein it is provided that if any letter of intent has already been issued by the State Government for granting mining lease before the commencement of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Amendment Act, 2015, the mining lease shall be granted subject to fulfillment of the conditions of the previous approval or the letter of intent within a period of two years from the date of commencement of the said Act. In the present case also by letter dated third renewal to the mining lease was granted subject to the fulfillment of the conditions of the approval and as such the petitioner is bound to fulfill the conditions before taking benefit of the same. Thus, the petitioner, prima facie, has failed to establish its prima facie case more strong vis-à-vis the case the respondent So far the contention regarding balance of convenience, it has to be kept in mind that revenue is the part and partial of the development of the State and any restraint therein will affect the interest of the public at large. Looking to the case from another angle also, the petitioner is generating huge amount of profit out of iron ore mines which is being used by steel plants and earlier also the petitioner has paid the amount of penalty under protest and if it is now directed to pay the remaining amount under protest, the same will serve the interest of justice and also no harm or prejudice is likely to be caused thereby.

9 In W.P.C No of 2015 also, prior to amendment in the MMDR Act the consent with regard to second renewal of lease of the petitioner was granted subject to some condition precedent and it had accepted the condition by depositing the amount of Rs.2.50 crores and resumed its mining operation and as such once the State has issued letter to the lessee, the renewal shall be granted subject to the fulfillment of the condition precedent. 21. Looking to the fact that earlier also on account of deposit of some part payment against the outstanding dues, forwarding notes have been issued by the respondent No.5, the last forwarding note was valid up to 28 th July, 2015, and the fact that huge outstanding amount is involved in W.P.(C) No.3768 of 2015 coupled with the fact that State respondent Itself has given liberty to clear that payment in three equal monthly installments effective from August, 2015, the writ petitioner-m/s Tata Steel Limited is directed to make the payment of the said amount again within three equal installments; the first installment to be cleared by 15 th October, 2015, second installment by 15 th November, 2015 and third installment by 15 th December, This shall, however, be without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the respective parties. It is further clarified that the forwarding notes (challans) shall be issued for lifting /transporting iron ore in proportion to the amount deposited. The same arrangements shall be applicable to the writ petitioner- M/s Orissa Manganese and Minerals Limited in W.P.(C) No.3976 of Both the writ petitions on hand are admitted to hearing and to be heard along with L.P.A No.547 of 2014 and other cases involving the same issue which are already posted for 19 th November, Parties are directed to complete their respective pleadings meanwhile. (Virender Singh, C.J.) (P.P. Bhatt, J.) Anu/SI/Birendra/LAK

W.P. (C) No of 2005

W.P. (C) No of 2005 -1- W.P. (C) No. 1992 of 2005 WITH W.P. (C) No. 3105 of 2007 [In the matter of an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India] By Court: Jharkhand State Electricity Board through Electrical

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (T) No of 2013 with W.P. (T) No of 2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (T) No of 2013 with W.P. (T) No of 2013 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (T) No. 1686 of 2013 with W.P. (T) No. 1687 of 2013 M/s. The Rameshwara Jute Mills Ltd, Mining Lessee, through Krishna Kant Dubey, Orissa. Versus Petitioner

More information

W.P.(C) No.5740 of 2001 P R E S E N T HON BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA NATH TIWARI

W.P.(C) No.5740 of 2001 P R E S E N T HON BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA NATH TIWARI BY COURT: 1 W.P.(C) No.5740 of 2001 (In the matter of an application under Articles 226 and 226 of the Constitution of India) Parmanand Pandey & Anr.. Petitioners. Versus The State of Jharkhand & Ors.....

More information

Mr. Sunil Singh, Advocate : Mr. Dhananjay Kr. Dubey, Sr. S.C. I

Mr. Sunil Singh, Advocate : Mr. Dhananjay Kr. Dubey, Sr. S.C. I 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 3788 of 2015 1. Mira Sinha, wife of late Amrendra Kumar 2. Jaydeep Kumar, son of late Amrendra Kumar 3. Avhinav Amresh, son of late Amrendra Kumar

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Date of Judgment: FAO (OS) 298/2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Date of Judgment: FAO (OS) 298/2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Date of Judgment: 17.01.2013 FAO (OS) 298/2010 SHIROMANI GURUDWARA PRABHANDHAK COMMITTEE AND ANR... Appellants Through Mr. H.S.

More information

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Judgment Reserved on: 18 th November, 2015 Judgment Delivered on: 02 nd February, 2016

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Judgment Reserved on: 18 th November, 2015 Judgment Delivered on: 02 nd February, 2016 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Reserved on: 18 th November, 2015 Judgment Delivered on: 02 nd February, 2016 + WP(C) 10240/2015 & CM No. 25456/2015 M/S BHARAT POWER CONTROL SYSTEMS...

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (L) No of 2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (L) No of 2013 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (L) No. 3455 of 2013 M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited, Dhanbad... Petitioner Versus Sri Arun Krishna Rao Hazare, Ex General Manager (HRD), Bharat Coking Coal

More information

NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH (DELHI)

NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH (DELHI) QUORUM NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH (DELHI) 1. HON BLE SHRI JUSTICE C.V RAMULU, JUDICIAL MEMBER 2. HON BLE DR. DEVENDRA KUMAR AGRAWAL, EXPERT MEMBER MA NO. 1 of 2011 IN Between APPEAL NO. 3

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

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM; NAGALAND; MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Petitioners : WP(C) No.3049 of 2006 1. M/s. Bogidhola Tea and Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd. having its registered office

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION. TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 567 of 2017 JANHIT MANCH & ANR...PETITIONER(S) VERSUS WITH

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION. TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 567 of 2017 JANHIT MANCH & ANR...PETITIONER(S) VERSUS WITH 1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 567 of 2017 JANHIT MANCH & ANR...PETITIONER(S) VERSUS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS....RESPONDENT(S) WITH

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : TRAI ACT, 1997 WP(C) 617/2013 & CM No.1167/2013 (interim relief) DATE OF ORDER :

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : TRAI ACT, 1997 WP(C) 617/2013 & CM No.1167/2013 (interim relief) DATE OF ORDER : IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : TRAI ACT, 1997 WP(C) 617/2013 & CM No.1167/2013 (interim relief) DATE OF ORDER : 13.03.2013 IDEA CELLULAR LIMITED & ANR....Petitioners Through: Mr. Maninder

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

THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : DELHI SIKH GURUDWARA MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE (ELECTION OF MEMBERS) RULES, 1974 Judgment Reserved on: 17.12.2012 Judgment Delivered on: 20.12.2012 W.P.(C) 1074/2012

More information

CORAM: - HON BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD

CORAM: - HON BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W. P. (S) No. 3737 of 2008 with W. P. (S) No. 3753 of 2008 With W. P. (S) No. 3733 of 2008 With W. P. (S) No. 2666 of 2008... 1. Chhote Lal Yadav 2. Umesh Yadav

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

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + W.P.(C) 5537/2018 & CM Nos /2018 & 33487/2018. versus

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + W.P.(C) 5537/2018 & CM Nos /2018 & 33487/2018. versus $~40 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 5537/2018 & CM Nos. 21583/2018 & 33487/2018 M/S HIMACHAL EMTA POWER LIMITED... Petitioner Through: Mr Abhimanyu Bhandari with Ms Kartika Sharma

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (C) No of Bokaro Steel Workers Union 2. N.M.D.C. Mines Workers' Union Petitioners

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (C) No of Bokaro Steel Workers Union 2. N.M.D.C. Mines Workers' Union Petitioners 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (C) No. 3996 of 2006 1. Bokaro Steel Workers Union 2. N.M.D.C. Mines Workers' Union Petitioners Versus Steel Authority of India Limited and others Respondents

More information

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI REHABILITATION MINISTRY EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE. versus

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI REHABILITATION MINISTRY EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE. versus $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 8444/2011 Date of Decision: 29 th September, 2015 REHABILITATION MINISTRY EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE HOUSE BUILDING SOCIETY... Petitioner Through Mr.

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 HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI. W.P. (L) No of 2008

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI. W.P. (L) No of 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI. W.P. (L) No. 4484 of 2008 Birendra Kumar Singh Petitioner -V e r s u s- Secretary, Foundary Forge Co-operative Society Ltd., Dhurwa, Ranchi CORAM: - HON BLE MR.

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (Cr.) No.273 of 2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (Cr.) No.273 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (Cr.) No.273 of 2015 Basant @ Bashant Harlalka, son of Sri Jagdish Harlalka Resident of Village Manoharpur, P.O.& P.S. Manoharpur District Singhbhum (West)......

More information

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Judgment delivered on: December 11, 2014

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Judgment delivered on: December 11, 2014 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on: December 11, 2014 + W.P.(C) 8200/2011 RAJENDER SINGH... Petitioner Represented by: Mr.Rajiv Aggarwal and Mr. Sachin Kumar, Advocates.

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 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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CRIMINA PROCEDURE. CRL.REV.P. 523/2009 & Crl. M.A. No /2009(Stay)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CRIMINA PROCEDURE. CRL.REV.P. 523/2009 & Crl. M.A. No /2009(Stay) IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CRIMINA PROCEDURE CRL.REV.P. 523/2009 & Crl. M.A. No. 10941/2009(Stay) Reserved on: 17th February, 2012 Decided on: 1st March, 2012 YASHPAL KUMAR

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 JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W. P. (C) No of 2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W. P. (C) No of 2015 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W. P. (C) No. 3336 of 2015 M/S CORPORATE ISPAT ALLOYS LIMITED, HAVING ITS UNIT AT TOTATALWADI, P.O. BURUDIH, DISTRICT SARAIKELA KHARSAWAN, JHARKHAND THROUGH ITS

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

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 : ELECTRICITY ACT, 2003 Date of decision: 19th April, 2011 W.P.(C) 8647/2007

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : ELECTRICITY ACT, 2003 Date of decision: 19th April, 2011 W.P.(C) 8647/2007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : ELECTRICITY ACT, 2003 Date of decision: 19th April, 2011 W.P.(C) 8647/2007 JINGLE BELL AMUSEMENT PARK P. LTD. Through: Mr. V.K. Goel, Advocate... Petitioner

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (Cr.) No.261 of 2014 Md. Mansoor @ Mansoor Alam @ Manser Nauwa, son of Kalam Nauwa, R/o Wasseypur, P.O. Bhulinagar, P.S. Bank Moare, District Dhanbad.....

More information

Mr. Mukesh Gupta, APP for the State. Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Adv. for R-2. Coram: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA

Mr. Mukesh Gupta, APP for the State. Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Adv. for R-2. Coram: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT, 1881 CRL.M.C. No. 3426/2011 & Crl.M.A. No. 12164/2011(Stay) Reserved on:6th March, 2012 Decided on: 20th March, 2012 DHEERAJ

More information

JHARKHAND STATE ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION RANCHI (Case No.23/ ) QUORUM Shri Mukhtiar Singh, Chairperson Shri P. C. Verma, Member.

JHARKHAND STATE ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION RANCHI (Case No.23/ ) QUORUM Shri Mukhtiar Singh, Chairperson Shri P. C. Verma, Member. JHARKHAND STATE ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION RANCHI (Case No.23/2007-08) IN THE MATTER OF QUORUM Shri Mukhtiar Singh, Chairperson Shri P. C. Verma, Member. An application for setting aside the letter

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : LAND ACQUISITION. CM No of 2005 in W.P. (C) No of 1987

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : LAND ACQUISITION. CM No of 2005 in W.P. (C) No of 1987 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : LAND ACQUISITION CM No. 15134 of 2005 in W.P. (C) No. 1043 of 1987 Orders reserved on : 26th July, 2006 Date of Decision : 7th August, 2006 LATE BAWA HARBANS

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.(C)No. 2995 of 2008 With W.P.(C)No. 2999 of 2008 With W.P.(C)No. 1504 of 2009 With W.P.(C)No. 1505 of 2009 Tata Steel Limited Petitioner (in all cases). Vs.

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI. W.P.(C) No of 2014

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI. W.P.(C) No of 2014 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 3629 of 2014 Deoghar Mill (Deoghar Rice Mill) Jhausagarhi, Deoghar through its Managing Partner & Anr... Petitioners Union of India & Ors....... Respondents

More information

.. IN HIGH COURT OF DELHI:AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. I.A. No /2006 in C.S.(OS) No.795/2004

.. IN HIGH COURT OF DELHI:AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. I.A. No /2006 in C.S.(OS) No.795/2004 .. IN HIGH COURT OF DELHI:AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE I.A. No. 11454/2006 in C.S.(OS) No.795/2004 Judgment Reserved on: 09.08.2011 Judgment Pronounced on: 02.11.2011 MADAN LAL KHANNA

More information

THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: versus

THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: versus THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 20.04.2010 + WP (C) 13338/2009 APOLLO TYRES LTD, KOCHI Petitioner - versus UNION OF INDIA... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case:-

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SERVICE MATTER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SERVICE MATTER IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SERVICE MATTER W.P. (C) No. 2222/2003 & CM No.4818/2005 Reserved on : 22.11.2007 Date of decision : 28.11.2007 IN THE MATTER OF : Dr. Virender Kumar Darall...

More information

THE MINES AND MINERALS (DEVELOPMENT AND REGULATION) AMENDMENT BILL, 2015

THE MINES AND MINERALS (DEVELOPMENT AND REGULATION) AMENDMENT BILL, 2015 AS INTRODUCED IN LOK SABHA Bill No. 18 of 2015 THE MINES AND MINERALS (DEVELOPMENT AND REGULATION) AMENDMENT BILL, 2015 A BILL further to amend the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act,

More information

PRADEEP KUMAR MASKARA & ORS. Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.

PRADEEP KUMAR MASKARA & ORS. Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS. PRADEEP KUMAR MASKARA & ORS. Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION REPORTABLE CIVIL APPEAL NOS.9844-9846 OF 2014 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition

More information

Through: Mr. Deepak Khosla, Petitioner in person.

Through: Mr. Deepak Khosla, Petitioner in person. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE RESERVED ON: 12.09.2014 PRONOUNCED ON: 12.12.2014 REVIEW PET.188/2014, CM APPL.5366-5369/2014, 14453/2014 IN W.P. (C) 6148/2013

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI ABA No of 2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI ABA No of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI ABA No. 1051 of 2013 Umesh Prasad Gupta.. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Birbal Singh Munda... Opposite Parties Coram : HON BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.UPADHYAY.

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : LAND ACQUISITION ACT, Date of decision: WP(C) No. 3595/2011 and CM Nos.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : LAND ACQUISITION ACT, Date of decision: WP(C) No. 3595/2011 and CM Nos. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894 Date of decision: 24.05.2011 WP(C) No. 3595/2011 and CM Nos.7523/2011 YUDHVIR SINGH Versus Through: PETITIONER Mr.N.S.Dalal,

More information

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Through CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA O R D E R

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Through CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA O R D E R * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 1698/2006 % Date of decision : 17 th November, 2009. M/S SHAH NANJI NAGSI... Petitioner Through Mr. B.P. Aggarwal, advocate. versus F.C.I & ORS Through...

More information

ii) The respondent did not furnish a Bank Guarantee for the amount of Rs crores and also did not pay the service tax payable on the said amount

ii) The respondent did not furnish a Bank Guarantee for the amount of Rs crores and also did not pay the service tax payable on the said amount IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Civil Appeal Nos.... of 2009 (Arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 11964-11965 of 2009) Decided On: 06.08.2009 ECE Industries Limited Vs. S.P. Real Estate Developers P. Ltd. and Anr.

More information

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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : BID. Writ Petition (Civil) No.8529 of Judgment reserved on: January 13, 2008

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : BID. Writ Petition (Civil) No.8529 of Judgment reserved on: January 13, 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : BID Writ Petition (Civil) No.8529 of 2008 Judgment reserved on: January 13, 2008 Judgment delivered on: January 21, 2009 Mr. Virendra Kapoor Proprietor

More information

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 2467/2015

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 2467/2015 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgement delivered on: 2 nd December, 2015 + CRL.M.C. 2467/2015 PRADIP BURMAN Represented by: Versus... Petitioner Mr. S. Ganesh, Senior Advocate with Mr.

More information

Date of CAV : Pronounced on 11/2/2014. appellants against the order dated passed by Learned

Date of CAV : Pronounced on 11/2/2014. appellants against the order dated passed by Learned IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Misc Appeal No. 224 of 2011 Abdul Hamid and others... Appellants State of Jharkhand and others Versus Respondents Coram : HON BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.UPADHYAY For the

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. SUBJECT : Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. SUBJECT : Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 WP(C) No.14332/2004 Pronounced on : 14.03.2008 Sanjay Kumar Jha...

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI. W.P.(C) No of 2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI. W.P.(C) No of 2013 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 1192 of 2013 1. Chandra Sekhar Banerjee, S/o Late Dharani Dhar Banerjee, (Director, AdCept Technologies Pvt. Ltd.), R/o 14, Mandeville Gardens, PO

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. 1. Writ Petition (Civil) No of Judgment reserved on: August 30, 2007

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. 1. Writ Petition (Civil) No of Judgment reserved on: August 30, 2007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : ANTI-DUMPING DUTY MATTER 1. Writ Petition (Civil) No.15945 of 2006 Judgment reserved on: August 30, 2007 Judgment delivered on: December 3, 2007 Kalyani

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI Cr.M.P. No. 962 of 2006

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI Cr.M.P. No. 962 of 2006 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI Cr.M.P. No. 962 of 2006 A.C. Sinha-- -- - - -- -- -- -- ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Factory Inspector, Jamshedpur, Circle-I, Jamshedpur,

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (L)NO OF 2014

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (L)NO OF 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (L)NO. 2348 OF 2014 wp-2348-2014.sxw Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority.. Petitioner. V/s. The

More information

* THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 1089/2013 & CM No.2073/2013. Versus

* THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 1089/2013 & CM No.2073/2013. Versus * THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 1089/2013 & CM No.2073/2013 SETU NIKET Versus Pronounced on: 19.11.2015... Petitioner Through: Ms. Esha Mazumdar, Adv. UNION OF INDIA & ORS... Respondents

More information

1. Writ Petition (C) No.3638 of 2015

1. Writ Petition (C) No.3638 of 2015 IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH) 1. Writ Petition (C) No.3638 of 2015 1. Bahari Reserve Gaon Min Samabai Samity Limited, Village & PO- Bahari, PS-

More information

$~45 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Judgment delivered on:10 th September, 2015

$~45 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Judgment delivered on:10 th September, 2015 $~45 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 1050/2015 Judgment delivered on:10 th September, 2015 SWARAJ ALIAS RAJ SHRIKANT THACKREY... Petitioner Represented by: Mr.Arvind K Nigam, Senior

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W. P. (C) No of 2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W. P. (C) No of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W. P. (C) No. 7504 of 2013 M/s Narayani Fuels Private Limited through its Director, Dhanbad Petitioner Versus 1. Punjab National Bank through its Chairman, New

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR POSSESSION. Date of Decision: W.P.(C) 7097/2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR POSSESSION. Date of Decision: W.P.(C) 7097/2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR POSSESSION Date of Decision: 10.02.2012 W.P.(C) 7097/2010 USHA KUMAR... Petitioner Through: Mr. A.B.Dial, Senior Advocate with Ms. Sumati Anand,

More information

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + WP(C) NO.4707/2010. % Date of decision: 6 th December, Versus MAHAVIR SR. MODEL SCHOOL & ORS.

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + WP(C) NO.4707/2010. % Date of decision: 6 th December, Versus MAHAVIR SR. MODEL SCHOOL & ORS. *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + WP(C) NO.4707/2010 % Date of decision: 6 th December, 2010 SRISHTI SOLKAR & ANR. Through:... Petitioners Mr. U.M. Tripathi, Advocate Versus MAHAVIR SR. MODEL

More information

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + WP(C) No.235/2000 % Date of decision: 3 rd March, 2010 DULI CHAND Through:... Petitioner Mr. Pravin Sharma, Advocate. versus P.O.LABOUR COURT-VIII & ANR. Through:

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : PUBLIC PREMISES (EVICTION OF UNAUTHORIZED OCCUPANTS) ACT, Date of decision: 8th February, 2012

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : PUBLIC PREMISES (EVICTION OF UNAUTHORIZED OCCUPANTS) ACT, Date of decision: 8th February, 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : PUBLIC PREMISES (EVICTION OF UNAUTHORIZED OCCUPANTS) ACT, 1971 Date of decision: 8th February, 2012 WP(C) NO.11374/2006 OCEAN PLASTICS & FIBRES (P) LIMITED

More information

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM; NAGALAND; MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM; NAGALAND; MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Page 1 IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM; NAGALAND; MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Writ Petition (C) No. 1961 of 2010 Smt. Padma Rani Mudai Hazarika - Versus - - Petitioner Union of India

More information

Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, being aggrieved by the judgment. dated , passed by the Member (Technical), Railway Claims

Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, being aggrieved by the judgment. dated , passed by the Member (Technical), Railway Claims IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI --- Miscellaneous Appeal No. 324 of 2013 --- Sri Paramanand Vimal, S/o Sri Sukhdeo Singh, Resident of Village Raunia, P.O. Raunia, P.S. Khijarsaray, District-Gaya,

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI L. P. A. No. 511 of 2009

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI L. P. A. No. 511 of 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI L. P. A. No. 511 of 2009 1.State of Bihar 2.Secretary, Home (Special) Department, Government of Bihar, Patna Appellants Versus 1.Ravindra Prasad Singh 2.State of

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : MINES AND MINERALS (DEVELOPMENT AND REGULATION) ACT, 1957 JUDGMENT RESERVED ON:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : MINES AND MINERALS (DEVELOPMENT AND REGULATION) ACT, 1957 JUDGMENT RESERVED ON: IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : MINES AND MINERALS (DEVELOPMENT AND REGULATION) ACT, 1957 JUDGMENT RESERVED ON: 25.01.2012 JUDGMENT DELIVERED ON: 15.02.2012 W.P.(C.) NOS. 520/2012 & 521/2012

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT: SUIT FOR POSSESSION Reserved on: 17th July, 2012 Pronounced on 3rd August, 2012 W.P. (C) No.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT: SUIT FOR POSSESSION Reserved on: 17th July, 2012 Pronounced on 3rd August, 2012 W.P. (C) No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT: SUIT FOR POSSESSION Reserved on: 17th July, 2012 Pronounced on 3rd August, 2012 W.P. (C) No.865/2000 DIVINE UNITED ORGANISATION Petitioner Through: Mr.

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI : NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. W.P. Crl. No. 1029/2010. Decided on: 9th August, 2011.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI : NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. W.P. Crl. No. 1029/2010. Decided on: 9th August, 2011. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI : NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE W.P. Crl. No. 1029/2010 Decided on: 9th August, 2011. DEEPAK GARG Through: Mr. Vijay Agarwal, Advocate.... Petitioner versus

More information

THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA

THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MEGHALAYA, MANIPUR, TRIPURA AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) W.P(C) 4494/2004 NLK-204 Anuj Sonowal Son of Late Jadunath Sonowal C/o Sri Ratul Das, Vill-Khajuabeel,

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CRL.) NO.169 OF Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reforms

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CRL.) NO.169 OF Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reforms 1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CRL.) NO.169 OF 2017 Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reforms Petitioner(s) Versus Union of India and Another

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 184 OF

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 184 OF IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 184 OF 2011 Federation of SBI Pensioners Association & Ors....... Petitioner(s) Versus Union of India & Ors...............

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (C) No. 520 of 2005

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (C) No. 520 of 2005 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (C) No. 520 of 2005 Fr. Mariya Packian S.J. Petitioner -V e r s u s- 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh 3. Land Reforms Deputy Collector,

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU BEFORE THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE RAGHVENDRA S. CHAUHAN. Writ Petition Nos /2017 (T-IT)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU BEFORE THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE RAGHVENDRA S. CHAUHAN. Writ Petition Nos /2017 (T-IT) 1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23 RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2017 BEFORE THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE RAGHVENDRA S. CHAUHAN Writ Petition Nos.1339-1342/2017 (T-IT) Between : Flipkart

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No of 2013 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No of 2013 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 3966 of 2013 Anita Devi, wife of Late Basudeo Yadav, permanent resident of village Ratabhiar, P.O. & P.S. Gande, Giridih...... Petitioner Versus 1.

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI: NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Judgment pronounced on: I.A. No.13124/2011 in CS (OS) No.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI: NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Judgment pronounced on: I.A. No.13124/2011 in CS (OS) No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI: NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Judgment pronounced on: 07.03.2012 I.A. No.13124/2011 in CS (OS) No.1674/2011 SURENDRA KUMAR GUPTA Through Mr. J.S. Mann, Adv....

More information

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT ( THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH ) WRIT PETITION (C) NO. 2973/2006 Sri Ajit Kumar Kakoti Lecturer, Son of Late Padmadhar Kakoti, Assam Textile

More information

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Reserved on: % Date of Decision: WP(C) No.7084 of 2010

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Reserved on: % Date of Decision: WP(C) No.7084 of 2010 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: 25.11.2013 % Date of Decision: 28.11.2013 + WP(C) No.7084 of 2010 PARAS NATURAL SPRING WATER PVT. LTD. Through: Mr. S.K. Bansal, Adv.... Petitioner

More information

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Judgement delivered on: 12 th January, W.P.(C) 7068/2014

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Judgement delivered on: 12 th January, W.P.(C) 7068/2014 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgement delivered on: 12 th January, 2016 + W.P.(C) 7068/2014 RAJINDER PAL MALIK... Petitioner Represented by: Dr. Jose P. Verghese and Mr. Jawahar Singh,

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR POSSESSION Date of Judgment: RSA No.251/2008 & CM Nos.17860/2008 & 11828/2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR POSSESSION Date of Judgment: RSA No.251/2008 & CM Nos.17860/2008 & 11828/2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR POSSESSION Date of Judgment: 28.4.2011 RSA No.251/2008 & CM Nos.17860/2008 & 11828/2010 UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD..Appellant Through: Mr.P.K.Seth,

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

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

JUDGMENT. (Hon ble Arijit Pasayat, J.) Leave granted.

JUDGMENT. (Hon ble Arijit Pasayat, J.) Leave granted. 2009 NTN (Vol. 40) [IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] Hon ble Arijit Pasayat & Hon ble Lokeshwar Singh Panta, JJ. Civil Appeal No. 5166 of 2006 with Civil Appeal No. 5167 of 2006 Benara Valves Ltd. & Others

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

CORAM : HON BLE MR.JUSTICE VIRENDER SINGH, CHIEF JUSTICE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE P.P. BHATT. For the Appellant

CORAM : HON BLE MR.JUSTICE VIRENDER SINGH, CHIEF JUSTICE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE P.P. BHATT. For the Appellant 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal(DB)No.458 of 2014 Santosh Sahu son of Sri Aklu Sahu, resident of village Arya, PO & PS-Kisko, District-Lohardaga.... Appellant -Versus- The State of

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT MANIPUR AT IMPHAL. Writ Petition(C) No. 543 Of 2013

IN THE HIGH COURT MANIPUR AT IMPHAL. Writ Petition(C) No. 543 Of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT MANIPUR AT IMPHAL Writ Petition(C) No. 543 Of 2013 Shri Ngairangbam Somorendro Singh, Aged about 53 years, s/o Ng. Ibochou Singh, resident of Malom Tulihal, PO Tulihal, PS Nambol, District-Bishnupur

More information

$~11 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No. 3964/2017 INDO ARYA CENTRAL TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS),

$~11 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No. 3964/2017 INDO ARYA CENTRAL TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), $~11 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No. 3964/2017 Date of Decision: 12 th March, 2018 INDO ARYA CENTRAL TRANSPORT LIMITED & ORS.... Petitioners Through: Mr. Sachin Datta,

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No of 2014

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No of 2014 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 3482 of 2014 Balwinder Singh, son of late Bahadur Singh Nagi, Resident of Katras Road, PS Bank More, Dist. Dhanbad s/o Sardar Rawal Singh, R/o Gurunanakpur,

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE LPA 776 OF 2012, CMs No. 19869/2012 (stay), 19870/2012 (additional documents), 19871/2012 (delay) Judgment Delivered on 29.11.2012

More information

WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.1692 OF 2016 (Arising Out of SLP (C) No of 2012) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.1693 OF 2016 (Arising Out of SLP (C) No.

WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.1692 OF 2016 (Arising Out of SLP (C) No of 2012) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.1693 OF 2016 (Arising Out of SLP (C) No. 1 NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.1691 OF 2016 (Arising Out of SLP (C) No.27550 of 2012) RAM KUMAR GIJROYA DELHI SUBORDINATE SERVICES SELECTION

More information

(BY SRI D.N.NANJUNDA REDDY, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI L M CHIDANANDAYYA, ADVOCATE) A N D

(BY SRI D.N.NANJUNDA REDDY, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI L M CHIDANANDAYYA, ADVOCATE) A N D IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 24 TH DAY OF JUNE 2014 PRESENT HON BLE MR. D.H.WAGHELA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND HON BLE MR. JUSTICE H.G.RAMESH WRIT PETITION Nos.11940 & 19975 / 2014

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO OF 2018 SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NOS.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO OF 2018 SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NOS. 1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4001 OF 2018 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NOS. 15765 OF 2017] REJI THOMAS & ORS. Appellant(s) VERSUS THE STATE

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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SERVICE MATTER W.P. (C) No. 135/1997 Reserved on: 18th July, 2012 Decided on: 23rd July, 2012

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SERVICE MATTER W.P. (C) No. 135/1997 Reserved on: 18th July, 2012 Decided on: 23rd July, 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SERVICE MATTER W.P. (C) No. 135/1997 Reserved on: 18th July, 2012 Decided on: 23rd July, 2012 M/S SUNDERLAL JAIN CHARITABLE HOSPITAL... Petitioner Through:

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO OF 2018 VERSUS

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO OF 2018 VERSUS 1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 348-356 OF 2018 (Arising Out of SLP (Crl.) Diary No. 2398 of 2018) THE STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS APPELLANT(S)

More information

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Date of decision: 16 th February, Versus

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Date of decision: 16 th February, Versus *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CM(M) No.815/2007 % Date of decision: 16 th February, 2010 OIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION LTD.... Petitioner Through: Mr. V.N. Kaura with Ms. Paramjit Benipal

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. SUBJECT : Delhi Land Revenue Act, Reserved on: January 27, Pronounced on: February 22, 2012

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. SUBJECT : Delhi Land Revenue Act, Reserved on: January 27, Pronounced on: February 22, 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : Delhi Land Revenue Act, 1954 Reserved on: January 27, 2012 Pronounced on: February 22, 2012 W.P.(C) No. 2047/2011 & CM No.4371/2011 JAI PAL AND ORS....

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE. Judgment reserved on: Judgment pronounced on:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE. Judgment reserved on: Judgment pronounced on: IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN PENAL CODE Judgment reserved on:07.02.2012 Judgment pronounced on: 10.02.2012 W.P.(C) 734/2012 Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Another Petitioners Versus

More information

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT. Writ Petition (C) No.606 of 2016

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT. Writ Petition (C) No.606 of 2016 IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Writ Petition (C) No.606 of 2016 Sri Bhabesh Das Son of Late Dhruba Das Vill Kulhati, No.2 Hidalghurisupa Police

More information