Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: the uttaranchal open university act 2005 Court: supreme court of india Page 1 of about 58 results (0.096 seconds)

Aug 30 2018 (SC)

Bir Singh Vs. Delhi Jal Board .

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... interplay and interaction under articles 16(4), 341(1) and 342(1) of the constitution of india was referred to the constitution bench in state of uttaranchal v. sandeep kumar singh and ors., (2010) 12 scc794 with the following reference:-"13. a very important question of law as to interpretation of articles ..... approach of subhash chandra has been doubted, and the question as to the correct view has been referred to a constitution bench in the state of uttaranchal case. (5) by virtue of the specific ruling applicable in the case of union territories, in pushpa, whatever may be the doubts entertained as ..... no.4494 of 2006) on the aforesaid basis. the question referred was not answered.5. however, the question arising and referred to in the state of uttaranchal vs. sandeep kumar singh and others (supra) was felt to be surviving and subsisting in the present appeals also. accordingly, by an order of the ..... an obiter and does not lay down any binding ratio. the bench hearing the case i.e. state of uttaranchal vs. sandeep kumar singh and others (supra) took the view that it was not open to a two judge bench to say that the decision of a three judge bench rendered following 2 (1990) ..... high court recorded in paragraph 4 of the high court 6 (2005) 2 scc6734 order to the effect that the order impugned suffers from an apparent illegality as the appointing authority of the petitioner therein is the university and the university had acted at the dictate of the state government, which has no power .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 30 2018 (SC)

Sarv Rural and Urban Welfare Society Vs. Union of India .

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... interplay and interaction under articles 16(4), 341(1) and 342(1) of the constitution of india was referred to the constitution bench in state of uttaranchal v. sandeep kumar singh and ors., (2010) 12 scc794 with the following reference:-"13. a very important question of law as to interpretation of articles ..... approach of subhash chandra has been doubted, and the question as to the correct view has been referred to a constitution bench in the state of uttaranchal case. (5) by virtue of the specific ruling applicable in the case of union territories, in pushpa, whatever may be the doubts entertained as ..... no.4494 of 2006) on the aforesaid basis. the question referred was not answered.5. however, the question arising and referred to in the state of uttaranchal vs. sandeep kumar singh and others (supra) was felt to be surviving and subsisting in the present appeals also. accordingly, by an order of the ..... an obiter and does not lay down any binding ratio. the bench hearing the case i.e. state of uttaranchal vs. sandeep kumar singh and others (supra) took the view that it was not open to a two judge bench to say that the decision of a three judge bench rendered following 2 (1990) ..... high court recorded in paragraph 4 of the high court 6 (2005) 2 scc6734 order to the effect that the order impugned suffers from an apparent illegality as the appointing authority of the petitioner therein is the university and the university had acted at the dictate of the state government, which has no power .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 30 2018 (SC)

Kapil Kumar Vs. Delhi Subordinate ser.sel.board

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... interplay and interaction under articles 16(4), 341(1) and 342(1) of the constitution of india was referred to the constitution bench in state of uttaranchal v. sandeep kumar singh and ors., (2010) 12 scc794 with the following reference:-"13. a very important question of law as to interpretation of articles ..... approach of subhash chandra has been doubted, and the question as to the correct view has been referred to a constitution bench in the state of uttaranchal case. (5) by virtue of the specific ruling applicable in the case of union territories, in pushpa, whatever may be the doubts entertained as ..... no.4494 of 2006) on the aforesaid basis. the question referred was not answered.5. however, the question arising and referred to in the state of uttaranchal vs. sandeep kumar singh and others (supra) was felt to be surviving and subsisting in the present appeals also. accordingly, by an order of the ..... an obiter and does not lay down any binding ratio. the bench hearing the case i.e. state of uttaranchal vs. sandeep kumar singh and others (supra) took the view that it was not open to a two judge bench to say that the decision of a three judge bench rendered following 2 (1990) ..... high court recorded in paragraph 4 of the high court 6 (2005) 2 scc6734 order to the effect that the order impugned suffers from an apparent illegality as the appointing authority of the petitioner therein is the university and the university had acted at the dictate of the state government, which has no power .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 30 2018 (SC)

Ranchi Association Vs. Union of India and Ors .

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... court order to the effect that the order impugned suffers from an apparent illegality as the appointing authority of the petitioner therein is the university and the university had acted at the dictate of the state government, which has no power to ask for cancellation of an appointment made in accordance with the ..... obiter and does not lay down any binding ratio. the bench hearing the case i.e. state of uttaranchal vs. sandeep kumar singh and others (supra) took the view that it was not open to a two judge bench to say that the decision of a three judge bench rendered following the constitution ..... of delhi. this was accordingly conveyed to the departments vide this department s letter no.f.16(73)/97-s-iii/710 dated 30.06.2005, stating that all the scheduled castes/scheduled tribe candidates irrespective of their nativity, are eligible for reservation to the civil posts under govt. of ..... the schedule caste candidates in the union territory of pondicherry was legal and valid. in s. pushpa and ors. v. shivachanmugavelu and ors. (2005) 3 scc1 pondicherry government appointed selection grade teachers in 1995 under the scheduled castes quota not only from the scheduled castes candidates of pondicherry but also ..... of articles 16(4), 341 and 342 arises for consideration in this appeal. whether the presidential order issued under article 5 (2009) 15 scc4586 (2005) 2 scc6733 341(1) or article 342(1) of the constitution has any bearing on the state s action in making provision for the reservation .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 30 2018 (SC)

Tanvi Dinesh Patel Vs. The State of Maharashtra Tribal Development Dep ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... court order to the effect that the order impugned suffers from an apparent illegality as the appointing authority of the petitioner therein is the university and the university had acted at the dictate of the state government, which has no power to ask for cancellation of an appointment made in accordance with the ..... obiter and does not lay down any binding ratio. the bench hearing the case i.e. state of uttaranchal vs. sandeep kumar singh and others (supra) took the view that it was not open to a two judge bench to say that the decision of a three judge bench rendered following the constitution ..... of delhi. this was accordingly conveyed to the departments vide this department s letter no.f.16(73)/97-s-iii/710 dated 30.06.2005, stating that all the scheduled castes/scheduled tribe candidates irrespective of their nativity, are eligible for reservation to the civil posts under govt. of ..... the schedule caste candidates in the union territory of pondicherry was legal and valid. in s. pushpa and ors. v. shivachanmugavelu and ors. (2005) 3 scc1 pondicherry government appointed selection grade teachers in 1995 under the scheduled castes quota not only from the scheduled castes candidates of pondicherry but also ..... of articles 16(4), 341 and 342 arises for consideration in this appeal. whether the presidential order issued under article 5 (2009) 15 scc4586 (2005) 2 scc6733 341(1) or article 342(1) of the constitution has any bearing on the state s action in making provision for the reservation .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 30 2018 (SC)

Ashok Kumar Choudhary . Vs. Delhi Jal Board

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... interplay and interaction under articles 16(4), 341(1) and 342(1) of the constitution of india was referred to the constitution bench in state of uttaranchal v. sandeep kumar singh and ors., (2010) 12 scc794 with the following reference:-"13. a very important question of law as to interpretation of articles ..... approach of subhash chandra has been doubted, and the question as to the correct view has been referred to a constitution bench in the state of uttaranchal case. (5) by virtue of the specific ruling applicable in the case of union territories, in pushpa, whatever may be the doubts entertained as ..... no.4494 of 2006) on the aforesaid basis. the question referred was not answered.5. however, the question arising and referred to in the state of uttaranchal vs. sandeep kumar singh and others (supra) was felt to be surviving and subsisting in the present appeals also. accordingly, by an order of the ..... an obiter and does not lay down any binding ratio. the bench hearing the case i.e. state of uttaranchal vs. sandeep kumar singh and others (supra) took the view that it was not open to a two judge bench to say that the decision of a three judge bench rendered following 2 (1990) ..... high court recorded in paragraph 4 of the high court 6 (2005) 2 scc6734 order to the effect that the order impugned suffers from an apparent illegality as the appointing authority of the petitioner therein is the university and the university had acted at the dictate of the state government, which has no power .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 30 2018 (SC)

Govt. Of Nct of Delhi Vs. Sushila Devi

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... interplay and interaction under articles 16(4), 341(1) and 342(1) of the constitution of india was referred to the constitution bench in state of uttaranchal v. sandeep kumar singh and ors., (2010) 12 scc794 with the following reference:-"13. a very important question of law as to interpretation of articles ..... approach of subhash chandra has been doubted, and the question as to the correct view has been referred to a constitution bench in the state of uttaranchal case. (5) by virtue of the specific ruling applicable in the case of union territories, in pushpa, whatever may be the doubts entertained as ..... no.4494 of 2006) on the aforesaid basis. the question referred was not answered.5. however, the question arising and referred to in the state of uttaranchal vs. sandeep kumar singh and others (supra) was felt to be surviving and subsisting in the present appeals also. accordingly, by an order of the ..... an obiter and does not lay down any binding ratio. the bench hearing the case i.e. state of uttaranchal vs. sandeep kumar singh and others (supra) took the view that it was not open to a two judge bench to say that the decision of a three judge bench rendered following 2 (1990) ..... high court recorded in paragraph 4 of the high court 6 (2005) 2 scc6734 order to the effect that the order impugned suffers from an apparent illegality as the appointing authority of the petitioner therein is the university and the university had acted at the dictate of the state government, which has no power .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 30 2018 (SC)

Mukesh Kumar . Vs. Delhi Subordinate ser.selecn Bd .

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... interplay and interaction under articles 16(4), 341(1) and 342(1) of the constitution of india was referred to the constitution bench in state of uttaranchal v. sandeep kumar singh and ors., (2010) 12 scc794 with the following reference:-"13. a very important question of law as to interpretation of articles ..... approach of subhash chandra has been doubted, and the question as to the correct view has been referred to a constitution bench in the state of uttaranchal case. (5) by virtue of the specific ruling applicable in the case of union territories, in pushpa, whatever may be the doubts entertained as ..... no.4494 of 2006) on the aforesaid basis. the question referred was not answered.5. however, the question arising and referred to in the state of uttaranchal vs. sandeep kumar singh and others (supra) was felt to be surviving and subsisting in the present appeals also. accordingly, by an order of the ..... an obiter and does not lay down any binding ratio. the bench hearing the case i.e. state of uttaranchal vs. sandeep kumar singh and others (supra) took the view that it was not open to a two judge bench to say that the decision of a three judge bench rendered following 2 (1990) ..... high court recorded in paragraph 4 of the high court 6 (2005) 2 scc6734 order to the effect that the order impugned suffers from an apparent illegality as the appointing authority of the petitioner therein is the university and the university had acted at the dictate of the state government, which has no power .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 07 2011 (SC)

State of Punjab Vs. Davinder Pal Singh Bhullar and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 2012(1)KLT10; AIR2012SCW207; AIR2012SC364; 2012CriLJ1001

..... ., air 2006 sc 915; central bureau of investigation v. ravi shankar srivastava, ias & anr., air 2006 sc 2872; inder mohan goswami & anr. v. state of uttaranchal & ors., air 2008 sc 251; and pankaj kumar v. state of maharashtra & ors., air 2008 sc 3077). 34. the high court can always issue appropriate direction in ..... judicial, quasi-judicial and administrative proceedings equally. 74. similarly in mangal prasad tamoli (dead) by lrs. v. narvadeshwar mishra (dead) by lrs. & ors., (2005) 3 scc 422, this court held that if an order at the initial stage is bad in law, then all further proceedings, consequent thereto, will be non ..... overlooked or where different accused in the same case are being treated differently by the subordinate court. an inherent power is not an omnibus for opening a pandorabox, that too for issues that are foreign to the main context. the invoking of the power has to be for a purpose that ..... exercised assuming that the statute conferred an unfettered and arbitrary jurisdiction, nor can the high court act at its whim or caprice. the statutory power has to be exercised sparingly with circumspection and in the rarest of rare cases. (vide: kurukshetra university & anr. v. state of haryana & anr., air 1977 sc 2229; and state of ..... declared to be nullity and as a consequence, the fir registered by the cbi is also quashed. 80. however, it is open to the applicants who had filed the petitions under section 482 cr.p.c. to take recourse to fresh proceedings, if permissible in law. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 25 2008 (SC)

Shiv Prasad Vs. Government of India and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : JT2008(5)SC422; 2008(6)SCALE315; (2008)10SCC382; 2008AIRSCW5872; 2008LABIC3622; 2008(3)Supreme186

..... panel and according to the provision for horizontal reservation, they were entitled in turn, to get the appointment first.18. the university, through its registrar, further stated in the counter that the university had considered the provisions of the roorkee university act, 1947, the policy of reservation framed by the government of u.p. and also the direction issued and law laid down ..... those categories would be adjusted in the categories to which they belong, i.e. either reserved category of schedule castes (sc), schedule tribes (st), other backward class (obc) or open category (oc) in 'vertical' reservation and it would not violate constitutional guarantee.26. the court considered indra sawhney (i), applied it to the case on hand and held that ..... quota will be placed in the appropriate category; if he belongs to sc category he will be placed in that quota by making necessary adjustments; similarly, if he belongs to open competition (oc) category, he will be placed in that category by making necessary adjustments. even after providing for these horizontal reservations, the percentage of reservations in favour of backward ..... writ-petitioner had no occasion to make complaint against such appointment. the post was of open category (oc), i.e. general and respondent no. 4 was accommodated on that post on open category in women reservation quota.33. for completion of record, it may be stated that in 2005, writ-petitioner (dr. shiv prasad) was selected and has joined as associate professor .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //