Skip to main content

HC: No law bars signing of papers in capital letters

There is no law that prohibits a person from signing in capital letters, the Delhi high court said while directing the Centre to consider the application of a man who was denied job for signing in capital letters.

A bench of justices Gita Mittal and Deepa Sharma recently allowed the plea of Arif, who was denied appointment for the post of constable in Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) earlier this year, and asked the central government to consider his candidature, if he is otherwise eligible, within six weeks.

The bench relied on the court's previous judgment on a similar issue and said "it is well settled that there is no law which prohibits a person to sign in capital letters. It has been held in the judgment of this court...that a signature is a trait which a person develops over a period of time and these traits can develop even with reference to capital letters."

The court accepted Arif's claim that he was informed about the denial of job through a letter on May 2 this year in response to his query under the Right to Information Act. The court said, "The petitioner cannot be denied consideration for appointment if otherwise eligible for the appointment as constable in the CISF as the candidature of the petitioner was rejected mainly due to his signatures being done in English...."

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-06-21/delhi/40118608_1_delhi-high-court-cisf-central-industrial-security-force

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

Court approached in the early stages of arbitration will prevail in all other subsequent proceedings

In National Highway Authority of India v. Hindustan Steelworks Construction Limited, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court opined that once the parties have approached a certain court for relief under Act at earlier stages of disputes then it is same court that, parties must return to for all other subsequent proceedings. Language of Section 42 of Act is categorical and brooks no exception. In fact, the language used has the effect of jurisdiction of all courts since it states that once an application has been made in Part I of the Act then ―that Court alone shall have jurisdiction over arbitral proceedings and all subsequent applications arising out of that agreement and arbitral proceedings shall be made in that Court and in no other Court. Court holds that NHAI in present case cannot take advantage of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for explaining inordinate delay in filing present petition under Section 34 of this Act in this Court.
Post a Comment
Read more

No Rebate For Stamp Duty Paid In Another State - Bombay HC

A three judge bench of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court (Bombay HC) in a recent judgment in the matter of Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Maharashtra State, Pune and Superintendent of Stamp (Headquarters), Mumbai v Reliance Industries Limited, Mumbai and Reliance Petroleum Limited, Gujarat1 has held that orders in case of a scheme of arrangement under Section 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 (Act) involving different High Courts in multiple states, are separate instruments in themselves. Accordingly, stamp duty would be payable on all the orders (and consequently, all the states) without the benefit of remission, rebate or set-off.
Post a Comment
Read more

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...
7 comments
Read more