The said pay ceiling is achieved in the appellant Banks only when an officer reaches Scale-VII. Ganguli, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants, Shri Basavaprabhu S. Being aggrieved, respondent as well as the appellant preferred appeals before the High Court and both the appeals were heard together and disposed of by the impugned judgment. Although it is true that delay in sending the FIR to the magistrate can vitiate the investigation, but it is settled position that a cogent reasoning can override this procedural lacunae.
Advocates (click here to investigate) The appellant Banks, therefore, cannot take umbrage under the aforesaid Memorandum and deny reservation in favour of SC/ST employees while carrying out promotions upto to Scale-VI. Moreover, the prosecution case was supported by six strong and cogent eye witnesses, which was further corroborated by the medical evidence and the recovery memos. It is true that the observation was made in the context of contempt of Court proceedings, but the view expressed must be generally endorsed to preserve the purity of judicial proceedings.
Hence, he stated that FIR was lodged at about 9:00 PM. 5,700/- mentioned for the purposes of reservation as ? Patil, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the State of Karnataka, Shri P. 3,23,000/- with interest and proportionate cost. The above two arguments were also pleaded before the Advocates – their explanation, Trial Court as well as the High Court, and both the Courts below denied the averments and reasoned that the two errors did not prejudice the investigation. The impleaded party supported the order of cancellation inter alia on the ground that one of the conditions in the order dated Advocates (click here to investigate) 25th April, 2012 was that the document of transfer was to be executed within three months which was not done.
As a fortiorari, the policy of no reservation in the matter of promotion is applicable only from Scale-VII and above. JKCL, who had applied for transfer of part of mining lease and was aggrieved by rejection of its application moved an application before the High Court for being added as a party to oppose the writ petition and was impleaded as a respondent in the writ petition, vide order of the High Court dated 28th January, 2015. The High Court reversed the judgment of the trial court observing that the trial court acted more like an arbitrator in examining the suit claim and that the trial court erred in passing the decree in favour of the appellant-plaintiff for a sum of Rs.
This is what was said: Vishwanatha Shetty, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the MUDA and Shri Huzefa Ahmadi, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent No. Referring to the contract, the High Court held that the written contract governs the terms between the parties and any variation thereof ought to be in terms of the Advocates (click here to investigate) provisions of clause 11 of the contract and the appellant having not gone through the procedure envisaged under clause 11, the appellant cannot putforth a claim for a higher payment on the premise that it has executed some extra Advocates (click here to investigate) work over and above the stipulated quantity of the work.
226 of the Constitution filed by the respondent the requisition order was set aside by the Bombay High Court on the ground that the requisition was not for a public purpose and therefore could not have been made under s. 28-Society and the learned counsels for rest of the contesting respondents. On a writ application under Art. 5th Central Pay Commission). 5 of the Bombay Land Requisition Act, 1948 the Government of Bombay requisitioned by an order dated 12th May 1952, the premises specified therein, for a public purpose, namely, for bousiing an officer of the State Road Transport Corporation which is a public utility service.
The High Court perused the testimony of PW9, who is the Investigating Officer, wherein it was deposed that he recorded the statement (fardbeyan) at 4:30 PM, thereafter he went to the place of incident and the body of deceased Kashi Nath Tiwary was recovered from the well after one hour of his arrival, and the inquest and other proceedings were conducted. Similarly, in Muthu Karuppan v. 18,300/- (5th Central Pay Commission) and in the case of Public Sector Undertakings who are following Industrial Dearness Allowance (IDA) pattern, the monetary ceiling was fixed as ?
The Department of Public Enterprises had issued an Office Memorandum dated 08-11-2004 as to the salary limit of ? 20,800/- (from 01-01-1996, i. It, therefore, clearly follows that insofar as promotion from Scale-I to Scale-II, Scale- II to Scale-III, Scale-III to Scale-IV, Scale-IV to Scale-V, Scale-V to Scale-VI are concerned, reservation is to be provided. 5 of the Requisition Act. Parithi Ilamvazhuthi this Court expressed the view that the filing of a false affidavit should be effectively curbed with a strong hand.
The witness further stated that the FIR was sent to the Magistrate through Special Messenger on 22. Further, the transfer of entire shareholding by the newly formed company was indirect way to transfer the lease for consideration by GLKU to UTCL which was not legally permissible. It is an accepted fact that there was a delay of one day in sending the FIR. On appeal by special leave to the Supreme Court.