” Held, that condition No. It was further stipulated in the order that except the pay and allowances given to the respondent during suspension period from 7. In the impugned order, the writ court has, after reproducing the passage from Akhilesh Kumar (supra), opined that the controversy is covered by the judgment rendered by the High Court of Calcutta. The said principle has been reiterated in many a decision including the one in the Govindaraju v. Recording concurrence with the findings returned by the enquiry officer, the disciplinary authority opined that the respondent was not fit to continue any more in the Force and accordingly in exercise of power conferred under Section 11(1) of the Central Reserve Police Force Act, 1949 (for brevity, the Act) read with Rule 27-A(1) of the Central Reserve Police Force Rules, 1955 (in short the Rules) ordered the respondent to be removed from the service.
Mariamman which has been placed reliance upon by Mr. nThe contention of the learned Attorney-General is that in view of the changes referred to above which had the effect of setting up a common High Court for the United State of Travancore and Cochin with jurisdiction and power defined therein, the review application has become infructuous, for, even if it be allowed, there will be no authority which will have jurisdiction and power to pronounce an effective judgment after rehearing the appeal.
-The licensee should exhibit at the commencement of each performance not less than 2,000 feet of one or more approved films. In the first place, they have relied on what may be said to be an abstract proposition of law, that prohibition with a view to State monopoly is not per se unreasonable. In the second place, it has been said that the transport services are essential to the life of the community and it is conducive to the interests of the general public to have an efficient system of transport on public roads.
As a proposition of law, the first ground may not admit of any dispute but we think that the observations of Lord Porter in the Privy Council case of Commonwealth of Australia and Others v. 2001, he would not be entitled to any pay or allowances and the period of suspension shall be treated as such. May be, certain factors are common to both backward classes and PWD such as social attitudes and historical neglect etc. In the said case it has been laid down, the substantial question of law has to be framed for such a formulation is the sine qua non for exercise of power under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure 687 special condition 3.
4(a) and special condition No.  The intent is to turn PWD into agents of their own destiny. The 1995 Act was enacted to fulfill Indias obligations under the Proclamation on the Full Participation and Equality of the People with Disabilities in the Asia and Pacific Region. That apart, it was directed that medals and awards, if any, that had been received by the delinquent employee during service period shall be forfeited under the provision of Section 12(1) of the Act.
This case was not decided by a Full Bench under section 25 of the Act and, therefore no review is maintainable under section 26 The learned Judges of the High Court have upheld the validity of the legislation substantially on two grounds. The disciplinary authority concurred with the findings recorded by the enquiry officer and came to hold that the charges levelled against the respondent had been proved beyond doubt. It is extremely significant to note that the learned Single Judge has not even made an effort to appreciate the decision in Ghulam Mohd.
Thrust of reasoning of the first appellate court was that a major punishment of dismissal could be imposed in law.  PWD are not and cannot be equated with backward classes contemplated under Article 16(4). It is pointed out that a review may be admitted under section 26 of the United State of Travancore and Cochin High Court Act, 1125, only in cases decided under section 25 of the Act. “In my opinion”, thus observes one of the learned Judges, “even this total stoppage of trade on public places and thoroughfares cannot always be said to be an unreasonable restriction”.
It is quite unfortunate that the High Court has dislodged the finding without any analysis but reproducing a passage from the Calcutta High Court which had not referred to the ratio laid down by a two-Judge Bench of this Court in Ghulam Mohd. 725 the restrictions are reasonable or not would depend to a large extent on the nature of the trade and the conditions prevalent in it. There Lawyer in Chandigarh nothing wrong in the nature of the trade before us, which is perfectly innocuous.
It is pointed out that the preamble to the Act indicates that the legislation was’ passed in the interests of the general public who are undoubtedly interested in a suitable and efficient road transport service, and it was\ not proved by the petitioners that the monopoly, which was contemplated in favour of the State in regard to this particular business, was not conducive to the common welfare. Bank of New South Wales and Others (1) upon which considerable reliance has been placed by the High Court would indicate the proper way of approach to this question’ ” Advocate in Chandigarh Their Lordships do not intend to lay it down”, thus observed Lord Porter, “that in no circumstances could the exclusion of competition so as to create a monopoly either in a State Chandigarh Lawyer or Commonwealth agency or in some other body be justified.
The objective behind the 1995 Act is to integrate PWD into Lawyer Chandigarh the society and to ensure their economic progress. Bhat (supra) though the same was relied upon by the learned first Chandigarh Advocates appellate Judge.