Search Results for "Body Building Competition"

94 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 94 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Holds Body Building Eligible for 5% Sports Quota Reservation; Quashes Restrictive Government Resolution (2026)

The petitioner, a university-level Body Building Sportperson, challenged the Government Resolution dated 01/07/2016 which restricted the benefit of 5%...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

"Supreme Court Affirms Need for Minority Establishment in AMU’s Minority Status Dispute" AMU’s Minority Status Under Scrutiny: Establishment by Legislature Versus Minority Founding Rights

The Supreme Court judgment in Aligarh Muslim University v. Naresh Agarwal & Ors. primarily deals with the issue of minority rights in education, f...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

"Landmark Judgment on Property Rights and Public Welfare in Mumbai" "Balancing property ownership with the collective good under India's constitutional framework."

The Supreme Court examined whether Chapter VIII-A of the MHADA Act aligns with the principles of Article 39(b) of the Indian Constitution, which aims ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Petitioner in Municipal Permission Case — Withdrawal of Permission for Body Building Competition Held Arbitrary. Model Code of Conduct Cannot Be Used to Revoke Already Granted Permission Without Justification.

The petitioner, Vijay Jagannath Salvi, a social worker, sought to organize a Body Building Competition at Late Jayanta Nathu Devlekar ground. The Kaly...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Union of India's Challenge to Arbitral Award in Construction Contract Dispute. Court upholds arbitrator's findings on rate analysis and rejection of counterclaims under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

The Union of India, through the Executive Engineer, CPWD, filed a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 challenging ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petitioner's Challenge to Disqualification from Tender for Violation of Non-Compete Clause. Clause 8.31 of Licence Agreement Between GTI and JNPT Prohibited Promoters from Bidding for Competing Projects, and Subsequent Government Policy Could Not Be Read into Existing Contract.

The petitioner, APM Terminals B.V., a Dutch company, along with Container Corporation of India Ltd (CONCOR), formed a joint venture company called Gat...