Skip to main content
Citation Index • Supreme Court

Cases Citing Section 1

Statute: Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (arbitration-and-conciliation-act-1996)

Pramod Sah presently residing at C/o Bachchu Rajak, Mohalla- Mahendru, Near Malariya Office, P.S.- Sultanganj, District- Patna, presently posted as Dresser in the Department of Surgical I.C.U. Patna Medical College and Hospital, Patna. 12.Pushpa Rani W/o Purushottam Das presently residing at - C/o ...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →

Mufasil, District- Begusarai, Presently residing at C/O Bhushan Jee, Sakuntala Kunj, Subhakarmana Colony, East Laxminagar, P.S. - Ramkrishna Nagar, Patna presently posted as Dresser in O.T. - 4, Patna Medical College Hospital, Patna. 7.Ajay Kumar Son of Suryabansh Singh presently residing at C/o, M...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Mukesh Kumar Mandal v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 224Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

68% Match

Munger ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s: Mr. Anurag Saurav, Adv. For the Respondent/s: Mr. Anand Kishore Choudhary, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIBEK CHAUDHURI O...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
KS Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) 10 SCC 1

2017 10 SCC 1Supreme Court of India

68% Match

FACTS: Challenged Aadhaar biometrics scheme as violating privacy. Held: Right to Privacy is a fundamental right guaranteed under Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution of India. Ratio: Privacy is intrinsic to life and personal liberty, subject to proportionality tests for state restrictions....

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Mukesh Kumar Mandal v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 213Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

68% Match

labourer. He does not get work on each and every day in a month. Therefore, it is not financially possible for him to pay Rs. 6,000/- (Six thousand) per month to the opposite party. Accordingly, the learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that the amount of maintenance allowance may be reduced ...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Jyoti Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 143Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

68% Match

appointment letter and in his place, the respondent no. 8 was selected as Aganwadi Sevika. 4. On the other hand, the respondent no. 8 obtained only 58.60 % marks, much less than the petitioner, who obtained 76% marks, nonetheless her case was placed for consideration and, as such,...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Archana Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 354Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

68% Match

authorities shall take action against the petitioner in accordance with law. 6.A counter affidavit is filed on behalf of the State in which he has stated that any degree of Tribhuwan University, Nepal has been declared ‘not valid’ for appointment of regular/Niyojit teachers. All niyojan units were ...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Sita Ram Singh v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 452Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

68% Match

Sita Ram Yadav ( GP-16 ) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIBEK CHAUDHURI ORAL ORDER 410-09-2024The petitioners was a daily wage employee in Minor Irrigation Department in the District of Katihar. His service was terminated by an order dated 09.03...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Sahabuddin Ansari v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 759Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

68% Match

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1759 of 2024 ====================================================== Sahabuddin Ansari @ Shahabuddin Ansari Son of Yakuf Ansari, Resident of Dalpatpur, Police Station- Maharajganj, District- Siwan. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus ...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Sheo Charan Dalmia v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 232Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

68% Match

no. 38 (Old), Holding no. 96 (subsequent), presently part of Holding no. 1; (ii) further for direction to the respondents particularly respondent no. 3, 4 & 7 to abstain from creating unnecessary and unreasonable restrictions upon the petitioners in exercising their right to...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
← Previous PagePage 4Next Page →