Search Results for "mandatory debate"

Trending :

Bombay High Court Allows Appeals by Acquiring Body in Land Acquisition Compensat...
Bombay High Court Dismisses NHAI Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Disput...
Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Concurrent Findings in Sui...
Bombay High Court at Goa Dismisses Review Petition in Partition Suit Impleadment...
Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in Corruption Case Due to Unreliable Trap Witn...

Search Results for "mandatory debate"

196 result(s) found

Home Search Results

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 196 result(s)

High Court

High Court of Karnataka Quashes No-Confidence Motion Against Gram Panchayat President and Vice-President for Non-Compliance with Mandatory Notice Period Under Section 49(2) of Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993. The court held that the requirement of 15 days' notice is mandatory and failure to comply renders the motion invalid.

21 Feb 2025

The petitioners, Smt. Geetha (President) and Sri Basanagouda (Vice-President) of Hiregonnagar Gram Panchayat, along with other members, filed a writ p...

High Court

Bombay High Court Rejects Plaint in Commercial Summary Suit for Non-Compliance with Pre-Institution Mediation Under Section 12-A of Commercial Courts Act, 2015. The court held that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate genuine urgency to bypass mandatory pre-institution mediation, as the suit sought recovery of development management fees and security deposit without any specific instances of imminent threat.

11 Nov 2024

The plaintiff, Ekta Housing Private Limited, filed a Commercial Summary Suit against Shraddha Shelters Pvt. Ltd. and two individual guarantors for rec...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal Challenging Sanction and Cognizance in UAPA Case — No Infirmity Found in Sanction Order or Cognizance Proceedings. The Court upheld the validity of the NIA's takeover of investigation and the sanction order under Section 45(2) UAPA, finding that the timeline for independent review is directory and the cognizance order was based on prima facie material.

20 Sep 2024

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal filed by Fuleshwar Gope challenging the judgment of the Jharkhand High Court which refused to quash the sanctio...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Validates Sub-Classification of Scheduled Castes in Landmark Judgment. Upholding Equality Within Equality: Supreme Court Endorses State's Power to Sub-Classify Scheduled Castes for Targeted Reservation.

1 Aug 2024

The Supreme Court of India, in a significant ruling, has upheld the constitutionality of sub-classifying Scheduled Castes for the purpose of reservati...

High Court

Bombay High Court Quashes Removal of Sarpanch in No-Confidence Motion for Violation of Mandatory Notice Requirements Under Bombay Village Panchayats (Meeting) Rules, 1959. Failure to Provide Three Days' Notice to Sarpanch Renders No-Confidence Motion Invalid.

22 Feb 2024

The petitioner, Nirmala w/o Pandharinath Sarde (Shiralkar), was the Sarpanch of Shirala Village Panchayat. She was removed from the post by a no-confi...

High Court

Bombay High Court Quashes Removal of Sarpanch for Violation of Mandatory Notice Requirements Under Bombay Village Panchayats (Meeting) Rules, 1959. No-confidence motion invalid as three-day notice not given to Sarpanch and motion not properly moved for voting.

22 Feb 2024

The petitioner, Nirmala w/o Pandharinath Sarde (Shiralkar), was the Sarpanch of Shirala Village Panchayat. On 22.12.2023, an extraordinary meeting was...

High Court

Bombay High Court Upholds Validity of 50% Reservation for Women in Gram Panchayats — Rule 3(1)(c) of Maharashtra Village Panchayats (Reservation of Seats for Women) Rules, 1995 Held Intra Vires the Bombay Village Panchayats Act, 1958 and Article 243D of the Constitution.

9 Oct 2014

The case involves a Letters Patent Appeal filed by Shri Tatyasaheb Ramchandra Kale against the judgment of a Single Judge of the Bombay High Court dis...

High Court

High Court of Karnataka Quashes No-Confidence Motion Against Adhyaksha for Violation of Mandatory Debate Requirement. Failure to Allow Debate Under Rule 3(3) of Karnataka Panchayat Raj (Motion of No-Confidence against Adhyaksha and Upadhyaksha of Grama Panchayat) Rules, 1994 Renders Motion Invalid.

31 Jan 2014

The petitioner, H.N. Nagaveni, was elected as Adhyaksha (President) of Palagatti Grama Panchayat on 17.12.2012. On 21.12.2013, 15 members of the Panch...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Sarpanch's Challenge to No-Confidence Motion in Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act Case. Writ Petition under Articles 226 and 227 fails as no-confidence motion was validly passed in special meeting presided by Tahsildar under Section 35(3-B) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1958.

29 Jul 2013

The petitioner, Bhaskar s/o Laxmanrao Kadam, was the Sarpanch of Grampanchayat Nivgha (Bazar), Taluka Hadgaon, District Nanded. A special meeting was ...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Petitions Challenging Disqualification of Village Panchayat Members Under Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act. Disqualification Order Set Aside for Non-Compliance with Natural Justice and Lack of Proper Inquiry.

18 Aug 2010

The judgment concerns two writ petitions filed by members of the Gram Panchayat of village Krishna, challenging an order dated 23rd April 2010 passed ...

1 2 3

Full Name * Username * Mobile Number * Email Address * State/UT * City * Password * Confirm Password * Referral Code (Optional)