T.VAIPHEI, S.C.DAS
Folguni Laskar – Appellant
Versus
State of Tripura – Respondent
S.C. Das, J.
By filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners sought review of the common judgment and order, dated 26.02.2016, passed by this Court in WP(C) No.172 of 2015 and other writ petitions, in respect of the directions of this Court contained in Paragraph 87 [ subPara (vi), (vii) and (viii)] of the judgment.
2. We have heard learned counsel, Mr. D.K.Biswas for the petitioners and learned Advocate General assisted by learned counsel, Mr. B. Banerjee for the State-respondents.
3. It is submitted by learned counsel, Mr. Biswas that the petitioners were interveners in the writ petitions, disposed by impugned judgment dated 26.02.2016. They were not allowed to submit pleadings but argument advanced on behalf of the interveners i.e. the petitioners herein were heard by the Court. It is further submitted by Mr. Biswas, learned counsel that the petitioners were aggrieved by the directions contained in paragraph 87 [(vi), (vii) and (viii)] since those directions were not inconformity with the UGC guidelines in respect of selection of candidates for the post of Assistant Professor. According to Mr. Biswas, UGC was a party in the writ
Saraswati Industrial Syndicate Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Haryana, Rohtak
Meera Bhanja Vs. Nirmala Kumari Choudhury
Haridas Das Vs. Usha Rani Banik, reported in (2006) 4 SCC 78
Parison Devi & Ors. Vs. Sumitri Devi & Ors.
State of West Bengal & Ors. Vs. Kamal Sengupta & Anr.
Avtar Singh Sekhon v. Union of India & Ors. 1980 (Supp) SCC 562 : (AIR 1980 SC 2041)
Sow Chandra Kante v. Sheikh Habib (AIR 1975 SC 1500)
Parison Devi Ors. v. Sumitri Devi Ors.(1997) 8 SCC 715
Thungabhadra Industries Ltd. v. Govt. of A.P. (AIR 1964 SC 1372)
Aribam Tuleshwar Sharma v. Aribam Pishak Sharma (AIR 1979 SC 1047)
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
A valid signature must be in the candidate's own handwriting, as emphasized by the General Clauses Act and relevant case law.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.