WRIT PETITION NO.6789 OF 2016
1 Jan 1970...
Search Results for "temporary orders"
2569 result(s) found
Found 2569 result(s)
High Court
Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition Recognizing Contractual Tenancy Under Bataipatra in Land Dispute. The court held that a Bataipatra executed in 2001 creates a valid contractual tenancy under Section 4-A of the Hyderabad Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950, and set aside the orders of the lower authorities.
30 Apr 2026The case involves a dispute over land bearing Survey No. 235/B, admeasuring 2 Hectares 17 R, situated in Nilanga, Latur. The original petitioner, Vish...
- 119
High Court
Gujarat High Court Allows Petitions Challenging CAT Order on Pay Fixation for Regularized Employees. Court holds that last pay drawn before regularization must be protected and seniority must be counted from initial appointment as casual labourers.
6 Feb 2026The petitioners, who were initially appointed as casual labourers in the Department of Posts, were regularized after several years. They filed Origina...
- 67
High Court
Gujarat High Court Allows Petition for Pay Protection in Regularization Case — Tribunal's Order Modified to Protect Last Pay Drawn. Pay Fixation Must Consider Last Pay Drawn Before Regularization Under Service Law Principles.
6 Feb 2026The petitioners, originally engaged as casual labourers in the Department of Posts, were regularized in service. They filed Original Application No.11...
- 121
High Court
Gujarat High Court Upholds Tribunal's Order for Pay Fixation Based on Last Drawn Pay for Regularized Employees — Denies Seniority and Service Benefits from Earlier Date. The court held that while pay must be fixed protecting last drawn pay immediately before regularization, seniority and other service benefits cannot be claimed from the date of initial ad hoc engagement.
6 Feb 2026The petitioners, employees of the Union of India, were initially engaged on an ad hoc basis and later regularized. They filed Original Application No....
- 117
High Court
Gujarat High Court Dismisses Petitions Challenging Tribunal Order on Pay Protection for Regularized Employees. Pay Fixation Directed Afresh with Protection of Last Pay Drawn, but Seniority and Other Benefits Denied.
6 Feb 2026The petitioners, Anil D. Kagathara and another, were initially engaged as casual labourers with the respondent department and were later regularized. ...
- 59
High Court
Gujarat High Court Allows Father's Appeal for Interim Custody and Visitation Rights of Minor Son in Guardianship Dispute. Court holds that welfare of child is paramount and both parents have equal rights, granting father access to child during pendency of guardianship proceedings.
27 Mar 2026The present appeal was filed by the father, Jenishbhai Jaikishanbhai Rathod, under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984, being aggrieved by the o...
- 117
High Court
High Court Dismisses Teachers' Petition for Retrospective Approval and Pension Scheme in Primary Education Service Matter — Appointment Approval Cannot Be Antedated Beyond the Date of Sanction. The court held that approval of appointment cannot be granted retrospectively beyond the date of sanction by the Education Officer under the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977, and the Pension Scheme is applicable only from the date of approval.
24 Nov 2017The petitioners, Anil Dnyandeo Sarode and Subhash Kadu Zope, were appointed as teachers in a primary school run by respondent No.5, Leva Samaj Yuwa Se...
- 83
High Court
Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Seniority List of Customs Officers — No Violation of Principles of Natural Justice or Equality Found. The court held that the seniority list was prepared in accordance with the Recruitment Rules and the petitioners failed to demonstrate any arbitrariness or discrimination.
6 Feb 2018The petitioners, nine Superintendents of Customs (Preventive) working under the Commissioner of Customs (General), Mumbai, filed a writ petition chall...
- 43
High Court
Bombay High Court Allows Section 8 Application and Refuses Summary Judgment in Commercial Suit for Recovery of Rs. 54.46 Crores. The court held that the existence of an arbitration agreement in the overarching Logistics Agreement and Product Purchase Agreement mandates reference to arbitration under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, barring the court from passing a decree in the summary suit.
12 Mar 2018The plaintiff, Drive India Enterprise Solutions Ltd., filed a summary suit against the defendant, Haier Telecom (India) Pvt. Ltd., seeking a money dec...
- 67
