rahul agrawal
05 October 2013 at 21:18
Can I file a PIL directly to the Chief Justice of India online?
if yes , then how ? plz help me..
arvind
05 October 2013 at 10:33
The above act empowers the collector to calculate compensation for the land owners affected by rstrictions on their land by the above act.he act gives complete deta to this procedure.The collector acts on behalf of central govt./defense authorities a per the act being the chief revenue officer of the district.The only scope of hearing given in the act is for land owners in the court if they are disastisfied with collectors award and there also the proceedings are to be restricted to the interest of land owners as per the act.Are dfense authorities entitled for a hearing before the collector before he passes the award?They are not the aggrieved party, they are beneficiaries by imposition of restrictions on the land, it is the land owners who are the aggrieved party?
M.BASAVARAJA
05 October 2013 at 08:56
Dear Sir,
kindly help me to file the writ petition on Law university-karnataka.please suggest or improve the below matter.
1. The petitioner joined 3 years LL.B Course in the year 2009 at Law College, and completed the 3rd year LL.B Semester Course in December 2012 with securing aggregate 44.3214% through respondent’s university. The details of marks obtained the petitioner in each semester is as follows:
Semester
Maximum marks
Marks obtained
Percentage of marks
I semester
500
208
41.06
II semester
500
208
41.06
III semester
500
227
45.04
IV semester
400
171
42.75
V semester
400
191
47.75
VI Semester
500
236
47.02
Grand total
2,800
1,241
44.32
The petitioner is here with producing the photo copy of the consolidated statement of marks for kind perusal of this Hon’ble Court & the same is at Annexure-1.
2. The petitioner desirous to pursue higher studies in Post-graduation i.e. LL.M at respondent’s university, for which, the respondent’s university prescribed the minimum percentage of marks i.e. 45% in aggregate for general category students in order to admission to LL.M. Further, it is submitted that the respondent’s university regulation provides that the students who obtained aggregate percentage of marks i.e. 44.5 % & above shall be treated as 45 % and thereby he is allowed to admission for LL.M. Post-Graduation Course at respondent’s university. The photo copy of the LL.M. Admission regulations of respondent’s University is herewith enclosed at Annexure-2.
3. The petitioner has obtained 44.3214 % as the aggregate percentage of marks in 3 years LL.B Course as such, he is not eligible for the admission of LL.M. Course since he is shortage of 0.18 % to the requisite percentage is 44.5% as prescribed by the respondent’s university regulation.
4. When such being the condition, the petitioner has wrote a letter dated
01-07-2013 to the Register Evaluation of Respondent’s University with a request that the petitioner may be allowed to take improve of his 3 years LL.B percentage. The said letter was personally served upon the respondent’s university on 01-07-2013 and who endorsed to that effect. The said letter is enclosed herewith at Annexure-3. The said Register Evaluation, in spite of receipt of petitioner’s above said letter, has failed to reply or respond to said letter the reasons are best known to said authority.
5. When the petitioner has failed to receive any reply to his above said letter from the Register of Evaluation, the petitioner has forced to write a letter dated 19-8-2013 to the respondent through the principal of Vunki Sanna Rudrappa Law College, Bellary and the same was sent to respondent’s University and Register of Evaluation of KSLU, Hubli, by Speed Post. After receipt of petitioner’s above said second letter dated 19-8-2013, the respondent university had replied to the petitioner through e-mail stating that there is no such regulation of KSLU for seeking improvement of petitioner’s result. You should have anticipated and calculated your tentative percentage well before the expiry of RV/CV (Revaluation or Challenge valuation) Chance. The photo copy of letter dated 19-8-2013 as annexure-4, speed post receipt as annexure-5, e-mail reply by respondent’s University at annexure-6 are herewith enclosed for kind perusal of this Hon’ble Court.
6. The petitioner, on receipt of his sixth semester statement of marks, came to that he got less than 45% or 44.5% in aggregate of 3 years LL.B Marks and by the time, the R.V/C.V time was completed. And there is scope of improvement of his marks alone but on verifying the e-mail reply sent by the respondent’s University, petitioner came to know that there is no such regulation for the improvement as per the regulations of the KSLU. Hence, the petitioner has lost his opportunity for pursuing the higher studies i.e. LL.M. in respondent’s University due to short fall of his percentage in 3 years LL.B. Course and the affecting or curtails his fundamental right. As a result, the petitioner has no option except to invoke the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court and thereby to give directions of the respondent’s university to insert a provision for improvement in 3 years LL.B Course examination so as to enhance or increase his marks in KSLU’s regulations by way of writ of Mandamus & Certiorari to respondent’s university.
7. It is relevant to submit that the respondent’s University provides a chance of improvement to its Post-graduation students i.e. LL.M vide regulation and the said regulation copy is herewith enclosed at annexure-8 for kind perusal of this Hon’ble Court. But the respondent’s University has not provided such improvement chance of 3 year LL.B. Course students, as such, the respondent’s university is discriminating improvement chance to 3 year LL.B students and the same is violating the fundamental rights of the 3 year LL.B students and the same is to be rectified by this Hon’ble Court by giving directions to respondent’s university insert a provision for improvement in 3 years LL.B Course examination so as to enhance or increase students marks in KSLU’s regulations by way of writ of Mandamus & Certiorari to respondent’s university.
8. The court fee of Rs.100/- is paid on this writ petition under section of K.C.F & S.V. Act.
9. It is germane to submit that the petitioner is herewith producing the photocopy of the regulations as framed by the Vishweswaraya Technological University (VTU) Belgum, wherein the
10. The petitioner, therefore, prays that the Hon’ble High Court may be pleased to issue directions to the respondent’s University to insert the provision for improvement of 3 years LL.B results by appearing in re-examination of any semester so as to enhance or increase students’ marks like petitioner herein, in KSLU’s regulations by way of writ of Mandamus & Certiorari to respondent’s university and such insertion of improvement regulation would be effect from retrospective one, which would meet the ends of justice.
M.Basavaraja
Karnataka
sudhir
04 October 2013 at 21:23
Dear Sir,
Are Non Grantable Teachers are applicable for election Duty ??????
Can we approach to election duty officer
as we are non grantable Staff hence election duty is not applicable for us even
if we are working in Grantable college.
Second thing I have a small baby of 7 month
who having breast feeding.
QUERY ASKED ON BEHALF OF MY WIFE
request you reply on "sudhirpawar@hotmail.com"
regard
Sudhir
sudhir
04 October 2013 at 21:08
Dear Sir,
Are Non Grantable Teachers are applicable for election Duty ??????
Can we approach to election duty officer
as we are non grantable Staff hence election duty is not applicable for us even
if we are working in Grantable college.
Second thing I have a small baby of 9 month
who having breast feeding.
request you reply on "sudhirpawar@hotmail.com"
regard
GIRI PRASAD SARMA
04 October 2013 at 00:28
I have much evidences regarding fraud and corruption activities of POLICE TRANSPORT ORGANISATION HYDERABAD. I LODGED A CASE IN LOKAYUKTA IN 2012 JULY 24, BUT IT IS VERY DELAYING THE ISSUE , DUE TO ALL THE HIGHER AUTHORITIES ARE INFLUENCED JUSTICE , HOW TO APPROACH SUPREME COURT ? PL SUGGEST..... READ CAREFULLY ENTIRE WEBSITE FOR DETAILS...AND EVIDENCES...
SARMA @ folder647@gmail.com 9701609689
arvind
30 September 2013 at 12:33
Is opportunity of hearing a right even if the law under which order is passed has no provision for the same ?
pinky lego
29 September 2013 at 21:01
A Member votes against his own party candidate in a Panchayat Election. This attracts disqualification of membership as per Local Act and there is a compliant for his disqualification.Now, can the competent authority deciding the case authorised to check the Ballot papers/its counterfoils to verify if he has voted for or against as alleged?
J SRINIVASAN
25 September 2013 at 14:27
Whether the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965,the provisions therin is applicable to NATIONAL THERMAL POWER CORPORATION LIMITED A psu.
I need the applicability of the above rule to ntpc because, the provisions related to suspension reviw/revoke is not appearing in the rules of ntpc. Can any one help me in this regard?
© 2025 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Article 26 b of the constitution of india
can you tell me ruling of either high courts or supreme court on the detail discussion/ explanation/meaning of FREEDOM TO MANAGE RELIGIOUS AFFAIRS under article 26(b) of the Constitution of India, please.