Result of U.P. Higher Judicial Service (Main Written) Examination, 2014 Direct Recruitment to U.P. Higher Judicial Service held on 14th, 15th and 16th November, 2014 has been declared. High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Jabalpur notified Advertisement for recruitment additional district judges through M.P. Higher Judicial Service (Entry Level) Direct Recruitment for BAR, Exam 2015 Haryana Judicial Services Examination 2014-Pre is conducted on 10th of Jan 2015. The result is awaited. THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI will hold examination for direct recruitment against 14 vacancies to Delhi Higher Judicial Service on Sunday, the 06th April,2014-Last Date 06.02.2014 13/11/2013: While renewing the term of the appointment of the existing incumbents the State Government is required to consider their past performance and conduct in the light of the recommendations made by the District Judges and the District Magistrates. Therefore, the High Court could not have issued a Mandamus for renewal of the term of respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and other similarly situated persons and thereby frustrated the provisions of LR Manual and Section 24 Cr.P.C .- SUPREME COURT.
Go Back to High Court Judgements
  Date 4/24/2009 7:32:00 PM
  Appeal -
  Act -
  .......3. The only question is whether Tribunal has power to modify the penalty imposed by SEBI? According to the appellant the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to modify the sentence. The Tribunal in each case held that the proved charges against the respondent were not serious enough to warrant suspension of certificate of registration. 4. The respondent, on the other hand, supports the order of the Tribunal and contends that proportional penalty can be leveled and the modification done is clearly within the scheme and framework of the Act. It is submitted that when a regulator chooses to elect a particular form of authority, amongst various available penalties which is available and it is appealable the Tribunal has the right to modify it. Reference in this context is made to Section 15(T) of the Act. 5. There is no dispute that there was violation of the provisions of Section 12(1) of the Act read with Rule 3 of the Rules. 6. Section 12, 15A, 15B, Rule 3 of the Rules and Regulation 25 of the Regulation are relevant and read as follows:....... 9. Under Rule 21 of the SAT Rules, 2000 the Tribunal may make such orders or such directions as may be necessary or expedient to give effect to its Orders or to prevent abuse of its process or to seek the ends of justice. 10. In the instant case, the position of Broker/Sub-Broker in case of violation is statutorily provided under Section 12 of the Act, which has to be read along with Rule 3 of the Rules. No power is conferred on the Tribunal to travel beyond the areas covered by Section 12 and Rule 3. When something is to be done statutorily in a particular way, it can only be done that way. There is no scope for taking shelter under a discretionary power. 11. Above being the position the appeals are bound to succeed, which we direct. The orders of the Tribunal are set aside and that of SEBI stands restored. 12. Appeals are allowed. (Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT) (LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA) New Delhi, April 21, 2009