Search Results for "notice under section 34(1)"

472 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 472 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Validates Sub-Classification of Scheduled Castes in Landmark Judgment. Upholding Equality Within Equality: Supreme Court Endorses State's Power to Sub-Classify Scheduled Castes for Targeted Reservation.

The Supreme Court of India, in a significant ruling, has upheld the constitutionality of sub-classifying Scheduled Castes for the purpose of reservati...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

"Supreme Court of India Resolves Complexities in Taxation of Mineral Rights" "Judgment Clarifies Legislative Powers and the Nature of Royalty in Mining Sector"

The Supreme Court of India addressed a significant dispute regarding the distribution of legislative powers between the Union and the States, specific...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Bombay at Goa Dismisses Petitioner's Challenge to Land Acquisition Award Due to Unexplained Delay of 14 Years and Availability of Alternative Remedy. Petitioner Claiming Tenancy Rights Failed to Seek Reference Under Section 18 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

The petitioner, Fomento Resorts and Hotels Ltd, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the land acquisition ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Upholds Sub-Classification Within Scheduled Castes for Reservation in Punjab Act. State can provide preferential treatment to more backward castes without tinkering with Presidential List under Article 341.

The Supreme Court considered the constitutional validity of Section 4(5) of the Punjab Scheduled Caste and Backward Classes (Reservation in Services) ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Revenue Tribunal's Order in Tenancy Act Land Transfer Dispute. Petitioner failed to prove that respondent No.4 was not an agriculturist under Section 63 of the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948.

The petitioner, Nilesh Ravindra Varode, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad ...