Search Results for "government directions"

8011 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 8011 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Contempt Petition Against Municipal Corporation for Non-Compliance of Land Acquisition Order. Conditional Order Does Not Amount to Willful Disobedience Under Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

The petitioner, M/s. Chinchwad Devasthan Trust, a public religious trust, owned land admeasuring about 1,05,400 sq.m at Bhosari within the jurisdictio...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Frivolous PIL Seeking Multiple Unrelated Directions Including Anti-Organized Crime Unit, Cow Farms, and Cave Temple Commission. Petition Filed by Self-Styled Criminologist Lacks Factual Basis and Legal Foundation, Wasting Judicial Time.

The Bombay High Court dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by Crimeophobia – A Criminology Firm through its founder, Snehil Dhall, who...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Considers Writ Petitions Challenging MHADA's Cancellation of Police Housing Lease — Allotment Under Slum Rehabilitation Scheme at Gaikwad Nagar Questioned

The High Court of Judicature at Bombay heard two connected writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging an order of the M...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Quashes High Court's CBI Investigation Direction in Bail Application Due to Jurisdictional Overreach. High Court Exceeded Limits Under Section 439 CrPC by Issuing CBI Directions After Granting Bail, Without Exceptional Circumstances Required Under Article 226.

The State of Uttar Pradesh appealed against directions issued by a learned Single Judge of the High Court in a bail application. The High Court had di...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Upholds Age Limit and Recruitment Interval Rules for Uttar Pradesh Higher Judicial Service. Rules 8(1) and 12 of UPHJS Rules, 1975 Held Valid as Not Manifestly Arbitrary Under Articles 14 and 16.

The Supreme Court considered the constitutional validity of Rules 8(1) and 12 of the Uttar Pradesh Higher Judicial Service Rules, 1975. The petitioner...