Search Results for "Principal Director Competence"

317 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 317 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeals Challenging MPID Act Application in NSEL Scam Case — Held That MPID Act Applies to NSEL as a Financial Establishment and That Default in Repayment of Deposits Attracts Offences Under the Act.

The judgment arises from multiple criminal appeals and interim applications filed by various parties, including directors, brokers, and financial inst...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Dismisses Writ Petition in University Appointment Case Due to Non-Binding UGC Regulations. Appointment of Vice Chancellor Upheld as Sardar Patel University Act, 1955 Does Not Prescribe Qualifications and State Has Not Adopted UGC Regulations Through Legislation.

The dispute involved a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution challenging the appointment of respondent No.4 as Vice Chancellor of Sardar ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Quashes Reversion Orders of APMC Employees for Violation of Natural Justice and CCA Rules. Orders passed without show cause notice and without affording opportunity of hearing set aside as illegal and arbitrary.

The case involves multiple writ petitions filed by employees of the Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee (APMC) challenging orders of reversion pa...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Upholds Maharashtra Fire Prevention Act, 2006 as Constitutionally Valid. Levy of fire prevention fee under Section 12 is a fee, not a tax, and the Act is within legislative competence.

The petitioners, Vidarbha Taxpayers Association and a citizen, filed a Public Interest Litigation challenging the constitutional validity of the Mahar...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Refund of ESI Contributions Paid Under Mistake of Law — Employer Entitled to Restitution Under Section 72 of Indian Contract Act. Mistake of Law Does Not Bar Claim for Refund Under Section 75 of ESI Act, 1948.

The petitioners, M/s. Indian Hotels Co. Limited (owner of Taj Mahal Hotel and Taj Intercontinental) and its shareholder, filed a writ petition seeking...