Judgments - APPLICATION U/s 378
M/S. GUJARAT AMBUJA EXPORTS LTD & ANR. Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ORS.
SHOBHA RAM RATURI Vs. HARYANA VIDYUT PRASARAN NIGAM LTD.& ORS
Having given our thoughtful consideration to the controversy, we are satisfied, that after the impugned order of retirement dated 31.12.2002 was set aside, the appellant was entitled to all consequential benefits. The fault lies with the respondents in not having utilised the services of the appellant for the period from 1.1.2003 to 31.12.2005. Had the appellant been allowed to continue in service, Full Judgment
A. ANDISAMY CHETTIAR Vs. A. SUBBURAJ CHETTIAR
RATTAN SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
STATE OF HARYANA & ORS. Vs. R.K. GUPTA & ORS.
DR. NTR UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES Vs. L. PRAKASAM REDDY
M/S STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD. Vs. COMMR.OF CEN.EXC.RAIPUR
M/S ADANI AGRI FRESH LTD Vs. MAHABOOB SHARIF & ORS
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD Vs. HILLI MULTIPURPOSE COLD STORAGE PVT LTD
M/S. ADANI POWER LTD. Vs. GUJARAT ELECTY REG.COMMISSION & ORS.
PURUSHOTHAM Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.
Rajni Sanghi Versus Western Indian State Motors Ltd. & Ors.
LALARAM & ORS. Vs. JAIPUR DEVT.AUTH.& ANR.
POONA EMPLOYEES UNION Vs. FORCE MOTORS LIMITED & ANR.
NUNEY TAYANG Vs. KODELUM TAYANG & ORS
MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA Vs. MEDICITI INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES (MIMS) AND ORS.
INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. Vs. NILOUFER SIDDIQUI & ORS.
S.E.B.I. Vs. MAGNUM EQUITY SERVICES LTD. & ORS.
D.N. JEEVARAJ Vs. CHIEF SEC., GOVT. OF KARNATAKA & ORS.
This Court has repeatedly held that where discretion is required to be exercised by a statutory authority, it must be permitted to do so. It is not for the courts to take over the discretion available to a statutory authority and render a decision. In the present case, the High Court has virtually taken over the function of the BDA by requiring it to take action against Sadananda Gowda and Full Judgment