S.Singh
22 January 2013 at 23:53
i have a query , as per the bar council rule were an advocate Joins an alternate employment he is required to surrender his registration certificate with the bar council.
my query is the were an advocates Joins an alternate employment and fails to surrender his registration certificate with the bar council and subsequently after a short period he resigns from that employment and resumes his practice. in the circumstances, as the advocate has already resumed his practice he is not in the position to surrender his registration certificate....what the advocate is required to do under the circumstances? and would he be facing any penalty..for this innocuous lapse on his part .. Kindly reply .
mukesh maheshwari
22 January 2013 at 22:02
Hi,
1. Some times society is saying that PAYING GUEST OF STUDENT OR WORKING STAFF OR ANY PERSON IS NOT LEGAL. IS THE SAME CAN BE TREATED AS HARASSMENT TO THE MEMBER ?
2 . SOCIETY CAN STOP ANY MEMBER TO NOT ENTER IN THE PREMISES IF YOU HAVE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF OWNER .
3. SOCIETY SECRETARY OR CHAIRMAN CAN DO BUSSINESS OF ESTATE AGENT IN THE SAME BUILDING .
4. IS ANY ORGANISATION / COMPANY /PVT LTD COMPANY /proprietorship can work as service provider to the needy . if they follow agreement ,police verification, maximum rules of proper living style ,no any complaint with any nature of work and behavior , then how society secretary can enterfare in any ones living style .
SOME ANSWER IS CLEAR AND THANKS , BUT WHAT IS STATUS OF AGM ....
A) IS AGM A FINAL ATHOURITY FOR SOCIETY OR THE SAME CAN BE MODIFIED ACCORDING TO SITUATION ?
23/01/2013
Vee kay kapoor
22 January 2013 at 12:01
Sir,
I have mentioned different names in different documents. My school and degree name are not suffixed by my surname whereas in my office documents, PAN Card, Bank A/C.s have my name suffixed with my surname.
Whether this can create any problem for me?
Kindly suggest at the earliest.
Thanks and Regards,
Vikas Kumar
Arka Foundation
21 January 2013 at 11:49
Dont have any details of the company to write directly to the PF office.
what are the documents to submit to get PF
from the current company.
XYZ
20 January 2013 at 23:11
is it possible to know the status of our anticipatory bail through online for the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, for example:- who is the judge going to be, what time is the hearing etc? and how can one know if someone has filed an FIR against them?
ROHITASHVA PURI
20 January 2013 at 14:56
upsc decleared the 57 assisstant labour commissioner vacancy can any one suggest me the books and study material and also coaching institute please see the notification 51/2013 upsc website reply me pleae .
yusuf
20 January 2013 at 11:45
Respected Sir,
I would like to bring to ur notice that how airtell is fleecing money from consumers like me. I have a Micromax A52 Dual sim with Aircel 9790812579 & Aitell connection 9790940028. Aircel is prepaid and I have activated 3 G on it. Airtell is a CUG connection in the company name . Ph No Airtell is 9790940028.
On 29th I checked my mobile bill through IVRS and it was showing Rs 6600/- , I called the call centre and enquired the reason for such a high bill, They informed that I had used GPRS close to 650 MB. I lodged a complaint with the call centre saying that I never requested for activation for the so called ZERO RENTAL PLAN of the service and they gave me a vague reason saying that since I had changed my mobile Airtel Zero Rental plan for Internet got activated by default. This is CUG company connection , for any plan the Airtell has to get the confirmation from the company . As per TRAI direction the services cannot be activated and renewed without the confirmation from the customer. Neither I was informed of the activation or the company has authorized or was informed and neither I or company was informed when it was renewed. There is no mention of Zero Rental Plan .The complaint was lodged complaint no 47885947 Dt 30/12/2012 and I recived a message saying that I get the update on 31 dec by 17.30. I recived a message on 30/12/2012 saying GPRS has been stopped on my mobile. Next day the person from airtell called me and conveyed that you will have to pay the amount as u have used GPRS 650 MB and closed the complaint. On 31 /12 /2012 I am recving a message saying your unbilled amount is Rs 6807.50 and on 1 st Jan 2013 Iam reciving a message saying that my unbilled amount is Rs 7312.80 even after reciving the message from them that GPRS has been deactivated on my mobile . I would like to bring to your notice that TRAI directions have been clearly violated by the company , , I had lodged a complaint again on 1st jan 2013 for which I was given interaction ID by airtell customer care 1189235511. The present bill amount claimed by airtel is Rs 8570/- In their bill itself it is advertised Rs 250/- for 1 GB plan.
And as per the TRAI norms the service provider in view of the above, And I quote from TRAI directives as given below
Since I have a company connection It was never intimated to me or my company regarding changes in the plan clear violation of TRAI direction
Kindly request you to provide me the guidance how should I file a legal case against airtell and claiming back the amount.
Rajesh Tandon
20 January 2013 at 08:51
What is the committed liability? What is its scope and definition? Where exactly this committed liability is defined i.e is it defined in the accounts book or in legal texts? Actually what has happened that I had to process a claim of telephone bill but due to certain procedural clarifications the said claim of telephone bill from the government could not be processed in the previous financial year. Now when I went to the Department of Integrated Financial Adviser (IFA), I was advised that if my Department higher authorities are convinced to process the claim out of annual contingency grant for this financial year it is not a problem with the Department of IFA on the grounds that my Department authorities have to certify that they do not have any problem in processing the claim out of a annual contingency grant of this financial year on account of committed liability of the government. I asked the officials of IFA as to where is the concept of committed liability given which they could not tell me but however they said if the government is supposed to pay you it is a committed liability. I checked it on Internet but I could not find it anywhere .To convince my authorities in my Department, I need to check up the exact definition of committed liability and where does it figure so as to clarify what it includes, its scope, any time limit under which claim has to be processed for committed liability before it gets lapsed. Kindly guide me suitably.
Rajesh Tandon
20 January 2013 at 01:01
1. I am presently looking after the ex-servicemen helpline. I received a case of a soldier's widow wherein she lost her husband and in the discharge book it has been mentioned that the death not attributable to military service and the cause of the death has been mentioned as heart attack. However she claims that the discharge book was asked back by the record office and when she had sent the discharge book to the record office, she had kept a photo copy of the discharge book wherein it has been shown that death attributable to military service and the cause of the death has been mentioned as heart attack.She claims that the record office has quietly changed the category from attributable to non-attributable. I personally examined the documents and I did find the difference between the two i.e fresh discharge book and the photocopied one. It does make a difference in the sense that if it is non-attributable she gets an ordinary family pension i.e 30% of the lost emoluments drawn and if it is attributable to military service then she gets the special family pension i.e 60% of the lost emoluments drawn.
2. There is another angle to the documents which he had shown to me. Through Army Central welfare fund (ACW F), she gets Rs one lakh amount in case of non-attributable to military service whereas in case of attributable to military service she gets only Rs 30,000/-. Maybe this has been done by the government as a sort of compensation to the widow whose husband has died on account of reasons of non-attributable to military service since in the longer run a widow who gets special family pension draws more than a widow with ordinary family pension. In the said documents the concerned officers signing the document has asked for two kind of certificates as under:-
(a) A Certificate from Next of Kin (NOK) that she has not got any other financial assistance from central government on account of death of her husband while claiming Rs. 1 lakh out of ACWF. The asking of this certificate is understood.
(b) A certificate that Next of Kin (NOK) that she will not petition to the government to reconsider the cause of death of her husband. Asking of such a certificate is somehow not understood. How come somebody can force a person in a democratic country to give this kind of certificate even when we have got criminals already convicted appealing to a higher court for reconsideration of the sentence/award given by a lower courts, to the extent that a convict has a right for a mercy petition to President for consideration even when Supreme Court has declared death penalty for a convict.
3. Further asking of a certificate as mentioned in para 2(b) above is rather alarming on account of para 69(c) of Pension Regulation 2008 Part II which mentions that in case the death is not held as attributable to military service, the next of kin of the deceased service personnel will be informed by the competent authority about non-entitlement as per Annexure VI To Appendix VI of the regulations giving reasons and quoting the rule position with advised to prefer appeal to the Appellate Committee on first appeal within six months of the receipt of the communication to that effect if he is aggrieved by the decision. In fact like a simple soul, this widow gave her consent on a separate letter giving reference of the record office letter saying that she will not represent to the government to reconsider the cause of the death of her husband.
4. Though para 82 of the Pension Regulation 2008 Part I, mentions the categorisation of the cases of the death for attributabl ity or non-attributablity wherein cases of death due to natural causes like chronic ailment of heart and renal diseases will entitle a widow for ordinary family pension. It could be just that a clerical mistake to mention the deaths as attributable to military service initially and then subsequently asking for the discharge book back and quietly amending the same ( on account of death due to natural causes) without informing the widow. For financial benefit, a possibility of relatives of widow misusing the document also cannot be ruled out. Today in the world of technology, hiding the remark of ‘not’ and photocopying it with the remark of attributable to military service is highly possible. But prima facie, it doesn't appear to be so on the photo state copy. Her claim appears to be genuine and more so when the certificate as mentioned in para2(b) above has been asked. Why should somebody ask such a certificate for non representation? Maybe they have just asked that so that if she represents and the category changes from Non-Attributable to attributable then she is not entitled to Rs. 70,000/-paid extra over the Rs. 30,000/-only applicable to cases of death attributable to military service and then whole process will have to be initiated to recover the amount of Rs 70,000/-
5.I got different reactions of the people with whom I discussed the case and I have got following different ambiguous questions for clarifications. These are as under:-
(a) can asking of such a certificate mentioned in para 2(b) above justified?
(b) Does asking of such a certificate mentioned in para 2(b) above be classified as an offence to force a person to render such a certificate?
(c) Does a person has the right of petition and appeal? If yes does it come under fundamental right of freedom of speech and expression and under human rights?
(d) Would asking of such a certificate fall under IPC 167-public servant framing and incorrect document with intent to cause an injury?
(e) The widow claims that the said certificate she has given since the requirement was spelt out in the letter issued from the record office. However if that be so can she represent now claiming that whatever certificate she has given, it has been under the misconception i.e IPC 90 whereby consent known to be given under fear or misconception?
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Archaeology-noc norms from temple - to plot for house construction
dear sir,
i have one plot near to the temple that temple is coming under the archaeological dept.
i approached them to contract a house on the plot they said as per the archaeological department 100mtrs is prohibited area and next 200mtrs is 100+200)noc area.
now my query is the measurements are (length/ distance)from the origin of the place (or) the boundary of the place
regards
r.ananthapadmanabhan