WRIT PETITION NO. 2207 OF 2005
24 Jul 2018The petitioner, a Hindi Trained Graduate Teacher with Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (KVS), was appointed at Bangalore in 1989 and made permanent in 199...
Search Results for "punitive order"
751 result(s) found
Found 751 result(s)
High Court
Karnataka High Court Examines Constitutional Validity of Amendment to CPC Fixing 120-Day Limit for Written Statement; Challenge to Provisions Curtailing Judicial Discretion and Inherent Powers. The Amendment, Introduced by State Legislature, Allegedly Overrides Supreme Court Ruling and Violates Articles 14 and 141 of the Constitution.
28 Jul 2026The High Court of Karnataka entertained two writ petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenging the constitutional validi...
- 27
High Court
Bombay High Court Dismisses Company's Challenge to SAFEMA Forfeiture Order for Property Linked to Narcotics Trafficking. Burden of Proof Under Section 7 SAFEMA Not Discharged by Claimant.
24 Dec 2013The petitioner, Imperial Exim (India) Pvt. Ltd., challenged an order dated 31 March 2011 passed by the Appellate Tribunal for Forfeited Property, New ...
- 75
High Court
High Court of Karnataka Allows EPFO Appeal Against HMT Limited in Provident Fund Dues Recovery Case — Establishes That Public Sector Undertakings Are Not Exempt from EPF Act Coverage and Recovery Proceedings. The Court Held That the EPF Act Applies to All Establishments Covered Under Section 1(3) and That the Respondent's Financial Difficulties Do Not Bar Recovery of Statutory Dues.
27 Jun 2023The case involves an appeal filed by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner and the Recovery Officer of the Employees' Provident Fund Organization (...
- 82
High Court
Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Non-Appointment as CESTAT Member — Selection Committee Recommendation Not Binding on Appointing Authority. The court held that the petitioner had no right to appointment based solely on the recommendation of the Selection Committee, and the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet (A.C.C.) was entitled to withhold approval.
22 Aug 2006The petitioner, Ramesh Motiram Ramchandani, a Commissioner (Appeals-I) in Customs & Central Excise, filed a Writ Petition before the Bombay High Court...
- 77
Supreme Court
Supreme Court Passes Interim Orders to Curb Illegal Mining in Odisha and Directs Central Empowered Committee to Identify Violating Lessees. Mining Operations Require Mandatory Clearances Under Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 and Environment (Protection) Act, 1986; Non-Compliance Renders Operations Illegal and Subject to Immediate Intervention Under Article 32.
1 Aug 2026Two writ petitions were filed under Article 32 of the Constitution by Common Cause and by Prafulla Samantra and Anr. against the Union of India and ot...
- 47
Supreme Court
Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal of ICAR Scientist Challenging Tenure Curtailment — No Enforceable Right to Complete Fixed Term When Appointment Expressly Reserved Power to Curtail. Reversion Based on Unsatisfactory Performance Not Stigmatic Under Service Law.
28 Apr 2026The appellant, joined ICAR as a Scientist in 1978 and later became Senior Scientist at CIAE, Bhopal. In 1998, he was appointed as ADG-ARIS for a perio...
- 221
High Court
High Court of Gujarat Hears Challenge to Constitutional Validity of Section 10A(2)(c) of MMDR Act and Rule 8(4) of MCR Rules, 2016. Petition Seeks Execution of Mining Lease Deed and Challenges Orders of Union and State Governments.
18 Mar 2026The petitioner, a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 (originally ABG Cement Ltd., later Vadraj Cement Ltd.), filed a writ petition befor...
- 17
High Court
Bombay High Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings in Legal Metrology Case — Non-Compliance with Sampling Rules. Failure to Follow Section 29(6) of Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 and Rule 23 of Standards of Weights and Measures (Enforcement) Rules, 1985 Renders Seizure and Prosecution Invalid.
26 Oct 2016The applicants, Colgate-Palmolive (India) Ltd. and its Deputy Company Secretary, filed a criminal application under Section 482 of the Code of Crimina...
- 129
Supreme Court
Supreme Court Allows Union of India in Railways Act Case — Demand Notices After Delivery Valid for Misdeclaration Under Section 66. Penal Charges for False Description of Goods Can Be Imposed at Any Stage, and the High Court Erred in Applying Provisions for Overloading to a Misdeclaration Case Under Section 66 of Railways Act, 1989.
5 Jun 2025The dispute arose when the Indian Railways raised demand notices against several consignors for misdeclaration of goods carriage. The respondents paid...
